BC20121119 Not Approved

NOT APPROVED

TOWN OF PEL= HAM

BUDGET COMM= ITTEE - MEETING MINUTES

Monday, Nov= ember 19, 2012

CALL TO ORDER – approximately 7:30pm

PRESENT:

Mr. Larry Hall, Mr. Dan= iel Guimond, Mr. Bob Sherman, Mr. Greg Farris, Mr. David Cate, Mr. Greg Smith= , Ms. Daryle Hillsgrove, Mr. Dave Cronin, Mr. Ken Dunne (arrived after the meet= ing commenced), Selectmen Representative Doug Viger, School Board Representat= ive Brian Carton

ABSENT:

None

Also Present: School Business Administrator Adam Steel, Father Anthony Kuzia of St. Patrick Church

2013 SCHOOL WARRANT ARTICLE VOTE

The warrant article language contained within is for review purposes only.

Article D – St. Patrick’s Child Benef= it Services – to raise and appropriate $32,093 for services defined by RSA 189:49 for approximately 108 Pelham children attending St. Patrick School. =

MOTION:

To approve Art= icle D – St. Patrick’s Child Benefit Services – “Shall the Pelham School District vote to raise and appropriate the sun of $32,0= 93 [Thirty-two thousand and ninety-three dollars] for Child Benefit Services= as defined by RSA 189:49 for approximately 108 Pelham children attending St. Patrick School? This is a special warrant article.”<= /u>

ROLL CALL VOTE:

(8-2-0) The motion carried. Mr. Farris = and Mr. Guimond voted no.

------------------------------------------------------------

Article A – Kindergarten Addition to = Pelham Elementary School – to raise and appropriate $1,750,000 for the construction and equipping of a new kindergarten addition to Pelham Element= ary School. Of the appropriation up to $1,000,000 is to come from State of New Hampshire Kindergarten building aid= per RSA 198:15R, and up to $500,000 is to come from the June 30 unassigned fund balance available for transfer July 1 of this year with the balance to come from general taxation. This shall = be a non-lapsing appropriation per RSA 32:7, VI and shall not lapse until the construction project is completed or by June 30, 2015, whichever is earlier= .

Mr. Hall said at the Budget Committee’s last meeting they had some discussion regarding the article and its wording. He understood the School Board hadn’t met since that Budget Committee meeting.

Mr. Smith commented he was in favor of the warrant article in principle from the kindergarten perspective but was confused the way the wording included the $500,000 (from the unassigned fund balance). He said he would have a hard time voting on the article with that wording and would rather have that wording removed.

Mr. Guimond agreed. He felt the wording regarding the $500,000 would deceive the tax payers. He said they should have all the facts = in front of them. He stated tonight he would have to vote no, but if the wording was removed by reconsideration he would reconsider his vote.

Mr. Steel said the article would be brought to the School Board based on the Bu= dget Committee’s recommendations.

Mr. Cate echoed the sentiments of the other Board members. He was in favor of the article, but wan= ted to ensure they were being straight= forward with the taxpayers. He would also = like to see the wording removed and would vote in the affirmative after reconsideration.

Mr. Carton asked if there was any number the Board would find acceptable given = the school typically returned approximately $100,000 at the end of each year.

Mr. Hall understood the $500,000 figure and asked that the Board further discuss their thoughts. He also said if the article was listed first and the number didn’t equal the amount specified, article C wouldn’t be able to be funded. Mr. Steel said that was correct; it would go in order on the ballot. Mr. Hall asked if not incl= uding a number would be a better scenario. Mr. Steel said his recommendation to the School Board will be based on the Budg= et Committee’s advice to remove that section of the warrant article. He noted that the School Board hadn’t m= et since the Budget Committee’s last meeting. The wording of the article was used in a neighboring town and they simply kept the same wording for Pelham. He didn’t feel there would be a problem removing the language.

Mr. Farris asked if the wording ‘up to $XXX’ was used if the unassigned fund co= uld be divided between the two articles. He believed these were legal questions because both warrant articles would be = taking money from surplus. Mr. Steel repl= ied that the DRA and Legal Counsel had both advised that the term ‘up to’ refer= red to the balance of what was left over for an unassigned fund balance. There would be no discretion by the Boa= rd after the article passed. The orde= r of the articles on the ballot determined how the funds would be allocated.

Mr. Smith reiterated that the average voter would have no idea about the implications. This was his reason = for wanting the language to be removed; it would keep the language transparent.=

Mr. Dunne arrived (7:40pm).

Mr. Sherman asked if the Board had the ability to change numbers and questioned= if they could amend the article to contain a different number. Mr. Steel wasn’t aware that the Budget Committee could amend warrant articles that were submitted by the School Board. Mr. Hall said the Deliberat= ive Session could amend the number. He= read the article language aloud without the wording pertaining to using $500,000 from the unassigned fund balance. =

Mr. Viger felt the intent of the article was clear and the rational the Board had was also very clear. He felt the Board should vote and see where the article stood. If it needed to change the School Board could come back at reconsideration to request a supporting vote.

There was further discussion regarding the article. Mr. Smith wanted to ensure that voters knew the exact cost of what t= hey were voting on. He said with the w= ording about some of the funding coming from an existing balance it was unclear how much it would be and what the price would be. Mr. Farris believed they should vote on the way the article was presented to them.

MOTION:

To approve Art= icle A – Kindergarten Addition to Pelham Elementary School – “Shall the Pelham School District vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $1,750,000 [One million, seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars]= for the construction and equipping of a new kindergarten addition to Pelham Elementary School. Of this appropriation , up to $1,000,000 [One million dollars] is to come from St= ate of New Hampshire Kindergarten building aid per RSA 198:15R and up to $500= ,000 [Five hundred thousand dollars] is to come from the June 30 unassigned fu= nd balance [surplus] available for transfer on July 1 of this year with the balance to come from general taxation? This shall be a non-lapsing appropriation per RSA 32:7, VI and sha= ll not lapse until the construction project is completed or by June 30, 2015, whichever is earlier.”

ROLL CALL VOTE:

(3-8-0) The motion failed. Mr. Viger, Mr. Carton and Mr. Dunne voted in the affirmative; the remainder of the Board voted no.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Article B – Architecture & Engine= ering Fees for Pelham High School Renovation – to raise and appropriate $700,= 000 for architecture and engineering fees to prepare drawings and to develop an initial guaranteed maximum price contract for a long term facilities soluti= on involving Pelham Memorial School and Pelham High School.

Mr. Sherman referenced the NEASC letter that contained several items he felt ne= eded clarification. It appeared the ite= ms were either addressed or in the process of being addressed. Mr. Carton commented that the school wo= uld remain on warning until all of the deficiencies listed in the original lett= er were addressed; the outline referred to by Mr. Sherman was not the complete list.

Mr. Cate stated he would be voting in the affirmative because the article would= n’t cover just a study, it would be used toward a solution.

Mr. Smith asked how long it would take for the funds to be spent if the article passed. Mr. Steel targeted mid-late December to have the process ready to continue next year.

Mr. Sherman was worried about the number of items the taxpayers would be faced with. He said he would have to vot= e no at this time until he had a clear picture of the impacts. Mr. Guimond found it inappropriate that several large dollar items were continually being put on the ballot at one time.

Mr. Dunne understood there was money in the budget for architectural fees for (reviewing) the municipal building and asked how much of that money would be left over. Mr. Steel said they had earmarked most of those funds over the course of this year. He said whatever wasn’t spent would be returned to the taxpayers on the next tax rate.

Mr. Cate understood the request was for a two-phase project and noted nothing c= ould take place until something such as the proposed article was passed.

Mr. Smith confirmed that the School Board could withdraw an article. Mr. Steel said they could withdraw up u= ntil the warrant was signed in mid-January. Mr. Smith stated he would vote in the affirmative and leave it to th= e School Board to decide the priorities. He understood the challenge of having a lot of things hit at one time, but aga= in would leave it up to the School Board to decide the strategy.

MOTION:

To approve Art= icle B – Architecture & Engineering Fees for Pelham High School Renovation – “Shall the Pelham School District vo= te to raise and appropriate $700,000 for architecture and engineering fees to prepare drawings and to develop an initial guaranteed maximum price contr= act for a long term facilities solution involving Pelham Memorial School and Pelham High School? Construction= of this project will not commence without future action by the voters.”

ROLL CALL VOTE:

(6-5-0) The motion carried. Mr. Viger, M= r. Carton, Mr. Dunne, Mr. Cate, Ms. Hillsgrove and Mr. Smith voted in the affirmative; the remainder of the Board members voted no.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Article C – Maintenance Capital Reser= ve Fund – to raise and appropriate up to $50,000 to be added to the previo= usly established (1999-2000) School District Maintenance Capital Reserve Fund, w= hich would be funded from the June 30, 2013 unassigned fund balance available for transfer July 1, 2013.

Mr. Cate questioned if the Board would be allowed to vote regarding the article since they didn’t know how Article A would read and the funding for Article= C possibly being contingent upon that Article A wording. Mr. Hall believed the Board could vote = on Article C.

MOTION:

To approve Art= icle C – Maintenance Capital Reserve Fund – “Shall the Pelham School District vote to raise and appropriate up to the sum of $50,000 [Fifty thousand dollars] to be added to the previously established [1999-2000] School District Maintenance Capital Reserve Fund, with such s= um to be funded from the June 30, 2013 unreserved fund balance available for transfer on July 1, 2013? [Majority vote required]”

ROLL CALL VOTE:

(11-0-0) The motion carried. All members = voted in the affirmative.

ADJOURNMENT

MOTION:

(Guimond/Sherm= an)To adjourn the meeting.

VOTE:

(11-0-0) The motion carried.

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 7:56 pm.

= Respectfully submitted,

= Charity A. Landry

= Recording Secretary