Town Meeting voters in both Whitman and Hanson voted against supporting an override to fully fund the Whitman-Hanson Regional School District operating assessment during their respective sessions on Monday, May 6 – but the votes will affect the fiscal 2025 school budget in different ways.
In their “no” votes, Whitman Town Meeting opted instead to follow the Finance Committee’s recommendation to fund the $509,212 needed to balance the school district’s budget from free cash. Hanson’s override ballot question, which will appear on Town Election ballots in both towns on Saturday, May 18, will largely decide how the schools’ books will be balanced.
Whitman Town Counsel Michelle McNulty instructed voters that, if the article and the ballot question failed and Article 2 ended up being any less than the School Committee’s certified budget, that would equal a rejected budget, which goes back to the School Committee – which has 10 days to recertify the same, budget, make changes or do something new. The town would then have 45 days to consider the new budget and, if that is also rejected, then there must be a joint – or Super Town Meeting.
Hanson residents were asked to vote during consideration of the general budget lines without an override, which was the subject of Article 6.
School Committee member Hillary Kniffen noted that Article 6 is 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.
“I think it’s about time we voted no on this and stopped these overrides and give the taxpayer a break,” the lone Hanson resident to comment on the article said.
After a counted vote, Hanson was found to have rejected the override by a vote of 231 to 127.
The question is still on the ballot and will be used to determine the capacity to raise taxation would be as it heads back to the School Committee to determine the next step.
Whitman went into Town Meeting, deciding on a consolidated budget with $1.37 million in free cash and $681,142 in capital stabilization. Hanson began it’s Town Meeting with $1,486,433.56 in free cash and $1,459,355.70 in stabilization – of which the town planned to spend $794,000; $145,180 in Recreation retained earnings was available for expenditures.
There were so many people attending Hanson’s Town Meeting that they ran out of copies of the warrant and residents were asked to share during the two-and-a-half-hour meeting.
“My goal is to complete all business tonight and I ask that you remain for the duration of this meeting,” Moderator Michael Seele told the more than 223 people in attendance – he was good to his word as the session, which dealt with 54 warrant articles took more than four hours to complete.
The $509,212 being drawn from free cash would have meant about $96 a year in additional taxes on an average single-family home in Whitman.
Select Board Chair Dr. Carl Kowalski said this year’s approach to the school department budget was different from past years in that “the three sides” – schools, Finance Committee and selectmen – agree on what the assessment to the town should be.
“The support for the schools is unanimous, but there is also a decided disagreement over where that money should come from – and that does complicate matters,” Kowalski said, explaining that the Select Board favored an override because it adds to, rather than subtract from future fiscal stability. But he said he was confident that Town Meeting would do the right thing.
Voters speaking at town meetings spoke of concerns about senior homeowners being able to afford the added taxes, the impact of the Madden report on town financial planning, as well as parents fearful of what potential school department cuts could mean for their children’s education.
Police Chief Timothy Hanlon reviewed some facts about the Madden Report, which was presented to the town in November 2019, before the COVID-19 pandemic.
“It couldn’t have been calculated to incorporate such a shift in life for all of us,” Hanlon said. “The Madden report listed a 5-year average annual operating budget increase of 4.86 percent for the town and advised that this was not sustainable compared to annual increases in town revenues.”
The report also advised to refrain from using free cash to fund ongoing expenditures and mandated that few cash be used as a funding source for capital improvement plans.
“If you take all those things into consideration, this Article 49, so-called, the school override budget should be put to the people, not just the people who are here.” Hanlon said.
Resident Chris George, who served on the Madden Committee emphasized that the 5 percent formula being referred to was only to be used after the schools are fully funded.
“It was not to come into play until we got to that point,” he said. The state will not provide more funding until the towns act in that direction, but he supports the Finance Committee’s recommendation because an override right now would end up pitting one department against another.
High Street resident John Galvin said the article was not a yes or no vote for an override. It stipulated that, if it passes at the ballot, Article 49 would have passed that funding on to the schools.
“If we vote no tonight, we’re not killing the override,” he said. “It will still go to the ballot in two weeks, and if it passes in two weeks, the override passes. Whatever we do tonight doesn’t really matter.”
The “no” vote on Whitman’s override article provides another 90-day window to have another Town Meeting to vote on this again if it passes on the ballot,” Galvin cautioned. “So, let’s just pass this thing tonight so we don’t have to come back in two weeks if the ballot passes.”
That is precisely what Hanson voters are facing on their May 18 ballot, as well.
Whitman School Committee member Dawn Byers, meanwhile, argued that a question has already been decided.
“This exclusively puts teacher and staff positions at risk in our town,” she said. “The [Select Board] decided that this was strictly a school override, however by financial decisions made in the past and throughout the towns has shown us that this deficit affects our entire town.”
She argued that a “no” vote would not be a rejection of the school budget itself, but rather, a rejection of how the assessment is being presented, which represents only a 4 percent overall increase over last year’s budget – something often confused with the assessment increase.
“It is being split into two separate amounts, but as a School Committee member, I voted one number,” Byers said. “I voted $19,135,687. I believe in this budget.”
Residents like Bob Kimball of Auburnville Way, expressed concern that free cash is a symptom of overbudgeting.
Another resident pointed to the tax impact already being felt because of Whitman Middle School and the DPW project, but she also said a lot of families are looking at the high cost of college and looking to send their kids to a vocational school.
“I think, as a taxpayer, I should have the right to vote [about] if the School Committee should get the extra money,” she said. “To me, I think they have more than enough.”
A mother of a first-grader, was worried about the effects of reducing the school budget.
“Education has costs,” she said. “And we owe it to the people of the town, whether they have children or not to educate [the town’s children].”
Select Board member Shawn Kain said he realized this is not an ideal time to seek an override, but he urged the meeting to vote “yes,” saying it is the right decision.
“But the question is, during financial circumstances how do we keep on financial ground that is solid?” he said. “If we use one-time money this year, then it leaves a hole in the budget next year that just amplifies the problem then the override we’re talking about is a much bigger one.”
Select Board member Justin Evans announced to the Whitman Town Meeting that Hanson had already rejected an override. Hanson’s Town Meeting had convened at 6:30 p.m.
“The board doesn’t ask for this lightly,” he said, noting that last year they asked for a little over $160,000 in one-time funds to support the W-H assessment as a compromise.
“It was, ‘Buy us time to fix this problem in a sustainable way,” he said. “It bought us a year, and this is the proposed fix. Hanson had a similar measure on the floor tonight. They voted it down … so it sounds like we’re going back to School Committee with a rejected budget, at least on Hanson’s side.”
He argued that an override is a sustainable option, raising the levy so that, going forward, the money is there.
Finance Committee member Kathleen Ottina said their budget recommendation fully funds all departments as recommended by the Town Administrator and Select Board, as well as fully funding the schools’ operating assessment and avoiding layoffs to town department and teachers by using free cash and capital stabilization to fund some capital articles and close budget gaps in Article 2.
“It does not require an override, so why has the fiscal ’25 budget developed into a power struggle between the [Select Board] and the Finance Committee?” she asked, suggesting it was the Select Board’s commitment to holding the School Department to a 5-percent assessment increase.
She said the FinCom recommendation is not the long-term solution needed, but said, “It is the cleanest way to get us through fiscal ’25.”
“Whitman can afford fully fund the fiscal ’25 Article 2 without an override, funding the school assessment and avoiding the layoff of eight Whitman elementary teachers and seven Hanson K-eight teachers as well as fully funding the recommendations .. that avoid the layoffs … of departmental positions,” she said.
The override, in Article 49 on the Whitman warrant, was taken out of order so it could be decided before the annual budget in Article 2.
“Using one-time funds, such as free cash for recurring expenses in a budget is never a good idea and is a frowned-upon financial practice,” said Town Administrator Mary Beth Carter in her opening statement at the meeting. “This is something we have worked very hard to avoid this year and it’s something we plan to avid every year, going forward.”
She said the dual budget presented in Article 2 was needed because the district certified a budget with a 7.87-percent assessment increase, which was 2.87 percent ($509.212) above what the town could support within the budget. One budget was presented as “Selectmen support with override,” including a 5-percent or $18,626,475 for the school assessment, in accordance with consultant John Madden’s recommendations for spending planning. Other town department requests were reduced by a total of $703,548.
A budget column headed “Selectmen recommend without override” is reflective of the many cuts that budget would necessitate if the district’s full 7.87 percent request was funded without a Proposition 2 ½ override – including 40 percent of salaries in unemployment costs for those laid off, including potentially three firefighters, three police officers, a DPW position, a clerk’s office position, one assessor’s office and one health board office position and another from the Council on Aging.
She sought support for the override article to permit voters to decide the issue at the ballot box.
A third column “Finance Committee Recommendation,” would fund the district to the full 7.87 percent increase by using the $509, 212 – and were the figures Town Meeting approved in Article 2.
“The FinCom budget presented tonight shows a deficit in the amount of $509,212,” Carter said of the figure sought by the override question. “The Finance Committee budget is not a balanced budget as presented.”
She said the reason the Finance Committee is not recommending an override this year because, among their reasons is that they want to see a “multi-million dollar override next year, which she does not support because of the new middle school project, a new DPW building and a proposed South Sore Tech building project, and other capital needs.
Carter outlined her use of the 5-percent increase in the school assessment, cutting all other town departments while increasing revenue where possible, “We were able to present a balanced budget” to the Select Board.
For his part, Finance Committee Chair Rick Anderson said the budget process “should not be confrontational,” their recommendation merely presented an alternative method of paying for the school budget
But, while he said the Select Board was seeking an override figure its members thought the town could afford, Anderson was urging a “no” vote on Article 49.
“This proposal does very little to address the long-term needs of Whitman,” he said. “We also feel that the School Committee has presented a school assessment that brings the needs of the district inline with developing a proposal for an operational override in the near future. This will not be an easy ask or an easy task. … A proposition 2 ½ override for one department is not going to get us there.”
Anderson said the recommendation to fund the school shortfall is in no way setting a precedent, but is rather, a bridge to the fiscal road ahead.
Ottina noted that little had been done to support an override article, and that surrounding communities, including Hanover are facing votes on multi-million-dollar overrides, which are being heavily campaigned for by both sides.
“Driving through these towns, you encounter signs: ‘Vote Yes!’ or’ Vote No!’ for their overrides,” she said. “I have yet to see a single sign for or against and override in Whitman. No effort has been expended to secure the taxpayers’ support.”