HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin brd of selectmen 04/04/01
'*'
Present:
Board of Selectmen
Minutes of
April 4 2001
, ~A'\"¡::IELD
n r'~1
.MA.S~ A_CHUSETTS
Chairman David W. McCarter; Clerk Bradfo'r'd e: WiUs; Selectmen
Louis P. Amoruso, and Daniel Donovan. Amos M. Robinson arrived at
7:40 p.m.
John O. D'Agostino, Town Manager
RECEIVED
TOWN C!. FRKS OFFICE
o 1 APR '2 AM 10: ° 5
r
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance
to the Flag.
· Minutes of March 28, 2001
Motion: To approve
(Wills-Donovan) 4-0 with Selectman Robinson not present Passes
r
· Warrant No. 41 in the amount of $2,365,295.66
(Amoruso-Donovan) 4-0 with Selectman Robinson not present and
Chairman McCarter abstaining from Municipal Building Committee payroll
· Warrant for the Special Town Meeting on April 25,2001
Motion: To close and sign the Special Town Meeting Warrant
(Wills-Amoruso) 4-0 with Selectman Robinson not present Passes
· Application of Robert D. Hearn, Jr. for a hackney license - CORI and RM V
printout were provided in folders for review. Need to vote on approval. If
approved, Town Clerk w1'll issue the license.
Motion : To approve
(Amoruso-Donovan) 4-0 with Selectman Robinson not present Passes
r-
· Memorandum from Shaun P. Burke, Director of Planning and Development,
regarding withdrawal of some street acceptances from Annual Town Meeting
Warrant
Board of Selectmen Minutes of April 4, 2001
1
t'"
· Letter from Town Counsel noting it is appropriate to designate the SERSG
Regional Administrator as a Special Municipal Employee - form attached to
be signed following vote
Motion: To appoint Catherine Salisbury as a Special Municipal Employee
(Wills-Amoruso) 5-0 Passes
· Letter from Judy Brennan requesting permission for The Garden Club of
Mansfield to close Park Row on Saturday, May 12th, from 7:00 a.m. to 1:00
p.m. for their annual plant sale on South Common and to put up signs on or
about April 28th on the North and South Commons, to be taken down
Saturday, May 12th after the sale. The Police Chief has approved closing of
Park Row with proper signage and roadhorses placed at both ends of Park
Row.
Motion : To approve
(Donovan-Amoruso) 5-0 Passes
r
· Letter from Beth Flint, Farmers' Market Manager, requesting permission to
hold the Farmers' Market in the Public Parking Lot on North Main Street as
they have in the past, starting Thursday, July 12th, and continuing each
Thursday through October 18th from 2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Motion : To approve
(Donovan-Robinson) 5-0 Passes
Roger Achilles and Bernie Dolan, Planning Board representatives to the Capital
Improvements Committee, and Shaun Burke, Planning Director, presented the
report of the Capital Improvements Program Committee (CIP) following their
review of requests by various Town departments.
Mr. Achilles as Chairman of the Capital Improvements Committee reviewed the
process used in reviewing the requests for capital expenditures and noted $1 million
was allocated for capital improvements for FY2002. Funding was recommended for
fewer than half the requests. The total of the projects recommended for approval
equals $9,548,257 to $9,698,257, with $999,257 for eighteen projects
recommended needing to be raised or appropriated. The balance of the additional
six projects recommended for funding will come from other sources. A copy of
their report is attached hereto.
,-.-
Town Manager D'Agostino explained the critical environmental need for the Mill
Pond Dam project recommended for funding. Completion of the project will ensure
our water supply is protected.
Board of Selectmen Minutes of April 4, 2001
2
t'"
Selectmen Robinson said he would like to see prior to Town Meeting bid prices and
the AMI price for the purchase of vehicles.
George Dentino, Gladiola Terrace - spoke on the Town budget and finances. He
noted in the last five years the school budget has gone up 60% and the benefit
package for the schools has gone up 10010. He questioned how the Board could
justify a budget with these types of increases and called for fiscal responsibility.
He stated that in 1998-99 the Town Manager was doing the school budget and the
costs were held down. Since then the Superintendent has been doing the school
budget. Clerk Wills noting telling the Town Manager it is his budget and he would
support whatever cuts he made. Selectman Amoruso noted the Town Manager has
met weekly with the Superintendent working to reduce the budget. He noted the
school budget is not a line-item budget and the Town Manager is working with them.
Chairman McCarter said the Town Manager is part of the process. Mr. Dentino
asked that they all justify the increases in the last five years. He asked the Board
of Selectmen to step forward and recommend a balanced budget.
r
He also spoke about revenue shortfall, with the budget established based on
anticipated revenue. He questioned how $50,000 expected from Great Waves
could have been anticipated since they never existed. He next commented on the
$18,000 spent on the Police Management Study that recommended that the officer
directing traffic at the Train Station should be an on-duty officer. He pointed out
it's 1 'Î hours at most, and the Town has to pay 4 hours of overtime for the service.
His discussions with commuters indicate that the officer on paid detail frequently
has to leave the post and respond to an emergency situation. He questioned why
the recommendation of the study is not being followed. Town Manager D'Agostino
noted in the final round of budget cut recommendations he is removing the $26,500
for the police detail at the Train Station. He stated his concern about not creating
a public safety problem and said we intend to follow the recommendation of the
study. Mr. Dentino asked the Board to take into consider what people in the private
sector are receiving in raises and benefit packages. Selectman Amoruso noted that
unless all unions agree to a reduced percentage, it cannot be done. Mr. Dentino
noted layoffs could be put into effect to reduce costs.
r-
Board of Selectmen Minutes of April 4, 2001
3
t'"
SABIS Charter School Director William Schwartz and Jose Alfonso of Educational
Systems were present at the invitation of the Selectmen to discuss the means of
funding the Charter School's budget. State Representative Michael Coppola was
also present for the discussion.
Chairman McCarter noted we have an $800,000 assessment for the school and
noted they were invited at the suggestion of Clerk Wills to be given the opportunity
to explain their program and the assessment.
Mr. Schwartz explained that SABIS Educational Systems is a system of schools
located throughout the Middle-East and Europe. They began in Foxborough three
years ago with kindergarten through 8th grade, expanding by one grade each year.
They currently enroll 650 students, with 125-130 coming from Mansfield. They
offer a college preparatory program, beginning in the early years with English, math
and world languages. They have a dress code and their focus is on academics.
Mr. Schwartz and Mr. Alfonso apologized for a previous problem in communication
with the School Department, noting information requested was not provided in a
r timely manner.
Selectman Donovan noted Mansfield has more children on the waiting list than any
other town. Mr. Alfonso noted there are 40 charter schools educating 14,000
students in Massachusetts. The average range is 250-300 students. There are
9,000 students on waiting lists around the state and the state has recently
increased the number of schools allowed to 120. As a regional school, they draw
students from 21 area communities.
Clerk Wills noted he heard a concern from our school department regarding a dollar
amount they felt was unfair. Mr. Alfonso explained the formula used to calculate
the tuition rate and the items excluded in the tuition rate. In their case they have
140 students from Mansfield with the tuition being $6,857 equaling $959,890.
Factoring state reimbursement leave a net loss of $369,842. The reimbursement
formula is intended to provide a year's notice of what the fiscal loss to the
community will be.
Chairman McCarter noted some of the costs calculated in the per pupil costs are
not costs the charter schools incur; i.e. interscholastic sports. Mr. Schwartz noted
that is true, but there are other services, such as physical or psychological
r services, that must be provided by them. They also do not receive funding that
local schools receive for placing students outside the district. Charter schools are
Board of Selectmen Minutes of April 4, 2001
4
r not required to accept special needs students requiring outplacement. They also do
not receive a portion of the schools facilities expenses and are raising their own
funds for building expansion. SABIS is a management contractor reporting to a
board of trustees approved by the Board of Education. The contract spells out
their fee structure and the management and responsibilities of the company. Every
five years they are required to go before the Board of Education to have their
charter renewed. A charter school operates as a private school only insofar as it is
free of public control. They now have to hire certified teachers. The average
tuition rate is a K-12 package. With the formula in effect, they are receiving a
higher rate for elementary school students, but are receiving less than their fair
share for high school students. Chairman McCarter noted the need for stability in
the assessment, pointing out the drastic changes from year to year in the
Southeastern Regional School assessments. 100'}'0 of the graduating class from the
Springfield charter school are going on to college, with many of them receiving full
scholarships to schools such as Smith and Brown.
Selectman Amoruso expressed his hope that they would continue to meet with the
Board on an annual basis.
Representative Coppola noted the issue is definitely the formula and the belief of
r the local communities that it is not equitable. He conceded, however, the need for
stability from year to year. Mr. Alfonso noted the formula is almost like a
"voucher" whereby the student takes with them the expenses they would incur in
the local district. It provides fairly the opportunity for attending a private school
regardless of financial means.
Selectman Amoruso noted the charter schools have a negative economic impact on
the local community, stating the money taken from the community is more than it
would cost the community if the student were actually educated here.
Town Counsel Robert Mangiaratti and Fire Chief Edward Sliney, Jr. were present to
discuss the review of the Tweeter Center license.
Attorney Mangiaratti outlined the duties and responsibilities of the Selectmen in
issuing an entertainment license. He noted they have some degree of discretion in
granting an entertainment license and are not obligated to grant it. He stated the
standards are public health, safety and order that must be met in considering the
r issuance of the license and reviewed the concerns to be considered as outlined in
his memorandum, a copy of which is attached hereto.
Board of Selectmen Minutes of April 4, 2001
5
r
He also addressed the Board's ability to impose conditions, noting the statute
allows the Board to impose conditions and promulgate regulations. Other issues
addressed were:
· judicial review by the applicant and the procedure for review
· fine structure - disagreed with the statute cited by the applicant
· limousine drop-off service; when a fee is charged it's reasonable to conclude
that it is the operation of a parking business
He noted the Selectmen are called upon to act in good faith and if their decision is
based on the concern for the public regarding public health, safety and order, it is
reasonable that their decision would be upheld in an appeal.
Selectman Amoruso asked about the requirement for EMrs. Chief Sliney noted we
are currently operating under a waiver that allows us to operate with one EM T and a
paramedic. CMR's require they operate with two paramedics and Tweeter Center
does not have a waiver. If their ambulance service has a waiver, they can operate
without the two paramedics required. The license calls for an ALS ambulance,
which allows an intermediate EMT. We are looking for them to adhere to the same
level of service that the Town provides. The license sets forth the minimum
r operating requirements, but does not show that when the 13,000 attendance level is
reached we provide three firefighters. What frequently happens is that one of the
firefighters has to go with the ambulance to provide the standard of care needed,
leaving them shorthanded at the facility. Attorney Mangiaratti noted if a licensee
violates the license, the licensing authority has the ability to file criminal charges.
Selectman Amoruso questioned whether the language could be interpreted to mean
if the licensee cannot provided the minimum staffing required for the ambulance,
they can instead pay the fine.
Attorney Mangiaratti suggested the need to recodify the license. The statute
provides the authority to modify, suspend or revoke for any violation. A hearing
would have to be held prior to the imposition of a fine.
Chief Sliney noted it's up to Tweeter to make sure they're getting what they've
contracted for. If the ambulance service fails, it still falls back on them because
they've agreed to provide a certain level of service. Selectman Amoruso questioned
how we would monitor it. Chief Sliney stated any company contracted to provide a
service and does not do so would be subject to investigation by the State. The
Service would not be in violation of 170.000 CMR; Tweeter Center would be in
violation of their license. Selectman Donovan noted the language was introduced to
r- prevent it from happening. Chairman McCarter noted the fine structure for
Board of Selectmen Minutes of April 4, 2001
6
r overtime performances has been in effect for several years. We do, however, have
the ability to modify, suspend or revoke their license for violations.
Selectman Robinson asked if there were guidelines used to arrive at the fines for
violation of ambulance and medical staff coverage and asked what the rationale was
for establishing the amount of the fines. Selectman Donovan said it was based on
what they as a subcommittee thought was fair, noting the fine had to be significant
enough to discourage violation.
Selectman Amoruso suggested the fine structure implies either that we don't trust
them or we're telling them they can do it and just pay the fine. Chief Sliney noted
CMR 170.000 deals with the ambulance company and assures Tweeter Center will
hire a reputable company. The fines deal with Tweeter Center.
Selectman Amoruso stated the escalation of the fines occurs too rapidly and it has
not been determined exactly how the time will be determined. He noted that if you
have 19,000 people you might just as well go overtime 29 minutes rather than 30
seconds because you'd pay the same fine. Selectmen Wills and Donovan noted they
did this is the best interest of the Town and they should end at the time they're
supposed to. Chairman McCarter noted the fine structure was instituted as the
r result of an overtime violation and Tweeter may have opened the door by paying a
fine. The goal is for them to end the concerts at 11:00 p.m., but this may be
punitive in nature and suggested the punishment does not fit the crime. Attorney
Mangiaratti noted the Board as a group needs to decide what is appropriate to
accomplish the purpose they want. If it's something the majority agrees on, it's
defensible. Town Manager D'Agostino noted adding language at the beginning of
paragraph 15. Selectman Amoruso questioned how the performers on the stage
were supposed to be on the same clock as the policeman's watch. He said he would
prefer to establish a method of everyone knowing what the official time is. He
noted the need to be practical.
Motion: To approve the license as proposed
(Wills-Donovan) 2-3 with Wills and Donovan in favor; McCarter, Robinson
and Amoruso opposed Fails
Motion: To approve the change on page 1 "applicable federal and state law..."
(Amoruso-Wills) 5-0 Passes
Motion: To approve the change on page 1 for the May 12th opening
(Amoruso-Robinson) 5-0 Passes
r-
Board of Selectmen Minutes of April 4, 2001
7
r Paae 2 - No.6 Limo drop off fee/access fee
Board members discussed the need to know how it's handled before a determination
can be made as to whether it constitutes a parking facility. It is believed
limousines cannot park in that area without paying a fee, in which case it is believed
it is a commercial parking facility. The concern was noted that it would not be
possible to get through site plan review in time for this year and it was suggested
to put it in and give them a waiver for this year.
Table until next week
Paae 2 - No.7
Motion: To strike first paragraph of Section 7, page 2
(Amoruso-Robinson) 3-2 with Donovan and Wills opposed Passes
Page 3 Minimum Security ReQuirements
Motion: To accept the changes relative to paramedics, with the last paragraph to
be dealt with separately
(Wills-Donovan) 4-1 (Robinson opposed) Passes
Paae 3 Bottom
Motion: To accept as written
r (Wills-Donovan) 5-0 Passes
Page 6 - first paragraph of amendment
Motion: To approve as written
(Wills-Donovan) 4-1 (Robinson opposed) Passes
Paae 6 - second paraaraph - "computers"
Motion: To amend to eight (8) computers
(Wills-no second)
Motion: To amend to five (5) computers
(Amoruso-Robinson)
Selectman Robinson asked that the matter be tabled until we could determine how
confidential information will be protected. Selectman Amoruso withdrew his
motion. It is hoped they will stay in the possession of the Police Department.
Motion : To leave the paragraph as presented
(Donovan-Wills) 3-2 (Amoruso-Robinson opposed) Passes
Page 6- third paragraph - "bio-hazardous waste"
Motion : To approve as is
(Wills-Donovan)
r- Selectman Amoruso noted the biohazardous waste matter is way overblown and he
believes it's discriminatory to treat patrons of Tweeter Center as though they are
Board of Selectmen Minutes of April 4, 2001
8
t'" hazardous while not treating "guests" of any other facility in that manner.
Selectman Robinson stated that we need a by-law that whoever discharges body
fluids in a cell is charged for the cleanup and not the facility at which they were
arrested. 2-3 (Amoruso, Robinson, McCarter opposed) fails
Motion: To remove the paragraph
(Amoruso-Robinson) 3-2 (Wills and Donovan opposed) Passes
Paae 7 - No. 15. first paraaraph
It was the consensus of the Board to table
Paae 7 - Overtime Fine Structure
Motion : To approve as presented
(Wills-Donovan) 2-3 (Robinson, Amoruso, McCarter opposed) fails
Motion: To keep as it was previously
(Amoruso-Robinson) 3-2 Passes (Donovan and Wills opposed)
Paae 7 - Ambulance and Medical Staff Coveraae
Motion: To strike fine structure for ambulance violations
r (Amoruso-Robinson) 3-2 (Donovan and Wills opposed) Passes
Paae 7 - No. 15 - first paraaraph
Motion: To have the timepiece of officer in charge coordinated with official time
of Tweeter Center and table until next week
(Amoruso-Robinson) 3-2 (Wills and Donovan opposed) Passes
Paae 8 - first paragraph
Motion : To approve as presented
(Amoruso-Robinson) 5-0 Passes
Page 8 - No. 16
Motion: To strike and substitute language as proposed
(Robinson-Amoruso) 5-0 Passes
Page 8 - last paragraph
Motion : To delete
(Amoruso-Robinson) 5-0 Passes
Attorney Mangiaratti offered to put the paragraphs and subparagraphs in a better
,-.- order prior to next week's meeting.
Board of Selectmen Minutes of April 4, 2001
9
t'"
Due to time constraints this topic was tabled and will be discussed at a future
meeting.
The Town Manager reported on the following:
. Passed out the proposed budget cuts and a report of where we stand with
the deficit. The Town cut $1.2 million from its operating budget and it's as
far as we can go without affecting services and CIP. Revenue has been
recalculated and we have an additional $87,000, but it's still short of what
we projected. He proposed to move the $45,000 for Hercules to a separate
article at Town Meeting and we have the money for it at this point. He
reviewed other cuts made and outlined in his handout.
,-.- The 11:00 p.m. meeting curfew was reached prior to the conclusion of the Town
Manager's Report, the Review of Warrant Articles, and Selectmen's Old and New
Business.
;-
Board of Selectmen Minutes of April 4, 2001
10
"' \
r
TOWN OF MANSFIELD, MASSACHUSETTS
Six Park Row, Mansfield, MA 02048
MEMORANDUM OF FINDINGS
cc:
John D' Agostino, Town Manager
....soard of Selectmen and Finance Committee
TO:
FROM:
FY 2001-2002 Capital Improvements Committee
DATE:
April 3, 2001
RE:
2001-2002 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
RECOMMENDATIONS
Consisting of seven voting and four non-voting members, the Capital Improvements
Committee met throughout the winter and early spring to hear capital expenditure
proposals from various town departments. Voting members included representatives of
the Board of Selectmen, Finance Committee, Planning Board, and Municipal Building
Committee. The four non-voting members were from the School Committee, Town
Manager's office, and Planning Department.
r
These meetings were held as part of the town's ongoing six-year capital improvements
plan. For planning purposes, a capital expense has been defined as a non-reoccurring
expense of $10,000 or more. The Capital Plan is the means by which capital needs are
presented, prioritized, and scheduled with a recommended method of financing for each
capital project.
This year, the Capital Improvements Committee addressed requests that totaled more
than $10 million. Of this amount, approximately $2.5 million were proposed to be raised
and appropriated within the annual operating budget, with the balance being funded
through the State Revolving Loan Fund (SRF) (Wastewater and Water Departments),
Clean Water State Revolving Fund (Engineering Department), transfer from available
funds and Wastewater Depreciation Trust Fund (Engineering Department), as well as
from the Water Department Enterprise Fund (Water Department).
r-
Each department making a capital request provided the Capital Improvements Committee
with a narrative description of each equipment purchase or project proposed with
supporting documentation demonstrating need, cost, and priority. These narratives and
accompanying spreadsheets were distributed to the committee before it met with each
department to discuss the capital proposals. Given the limited resources available to the
town for capital expenditures, $1 million was allocated in the proposed FY 2001-2002
budget by the Town Manager for the Capital Improvements Plan. The Capital
Improvements Committee's charge was to seek to recommend to Town Meeting its sense
of need and priority within the Town Manager's budget.
2
r
The committee began the process this year by identifying those capital items that have
been partially funded in prior years, but where additional funding to complete the project
or acquisition was necessary.
Following consensus on that issue, all departmental requests became the topic of
extensive and sometimes lively debate. The ëommittee, while recognizing the value of
all the requests, has recommended funding fewer than half of them. Those items not
recommended for funding this year will remain within the six-year capital plan and be
reevaluated next fiscal year.
The Capital Improvements Committee's final recommended Capital Improvements Plan
for FY 201-2002 totals almost $1 million. The attached summary of capital requests
provides all the specific requests and recommended funding amounts.
Finally, the Capital Improvements Committee voted to put approximately $8.5 million in
additional capital requests before Town Meeting. These requests are proposed to be
funded by sources other than raise and appropriate within the annual budget. As was
mentioned earlier, some capital projects will be paid for by zero- or no-interest loans
from various State Revolving Funds and repaid through water or sewer user rates. Others
are proposed to be funded through enterprise funds, and in the case of the Essex Street
land acquisition, a funding source has yet to be determined.
r
As in the past, all of these requests will be placed before the voters at Town Meeting,
with the appropriate departments making detailed presentations of their requests.
The Capital Improvements Committee was unanimous in its support of the proposed
Capital Improvements Plan for FY 2001-2002 and maintains its commitment to work for
the interests of the residents of Mansfield, its elected and appointed officials, and all town
departments to maintain a sound and responsible six-year Capital Improvements Plan.
Attachment
r
RA/jd
3
r
PRIORITY LIST OF CAPITAL
EXPENDITURES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002
ActivitvÆquipment Applicant Amount Runnine: Total
1. Hope Street Land Town Mgr $ 75,000. $ 75,000.
2. Fair Housing Land Fund Fair Hsg Cmt 10,000. 85,000.
3. Fire Alarm Boxes Pub Bldgs 38,500. 123,500.
4. Mem Pk Storage Bldg Pub Bldgs 50,000. 173,500.
5. 10- Wheel Dump Truck Highway 140,000. 313,500.
6. 4x4 2-Ton Dump Truck Highway 55,000. 368,500.
7. 4x4 I-Ton Dump Truck Highway 40,000. 408,500.
8. 4x4 Pickup Truck Highway 40,000. 448,500.
9. Ball Field Drainage Parks & Rec 50,000. 498,500.
10. Back Acreage for Fields Parks & Rec 25,000. 523,500.
11. Ladder # 1 Fire 116,657. 640,157.
12. Fire Alarm Equipment Fire 27,500. 667,657.
13. Lakeview Ave Drainage Engineering 70,000. 737,657.
14. Mill Pond Dam Engineering 172,000. 909,657.
15. Wheelchair Bus Schools 46,000. 955,657.
r 16. Paint Roland Green Schools 16,000. 971,657.
17. Jordan/Jackson Lighting Schools 20,000. 991,657.
18. Lift with Staging Schools 7,600. 999,257.
Total Raise & Appropriate Requests: $999,257.
OTHER FUNDING SOURCES CONSIDERED FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002
19. Essex Street Land Town Mgr 700-850,000. 700-850,000.
20. Data Gathering Update Wastewater 400,000. 1,100,000-1,250,000.
21. Iron & Manganese Facility Water 6,000,000. 7,100,000-7,250,000.
22. %- Ton Pickup Truck Water 24,000. 7,124,000-7,274,000.
23. EP A Stormwater Compliance Engineering 1,200,000. 8,324,000-8,474,000.
24. InflowlInfiltration Reduction Engineering 225,000. 8,549,000-8,699,000.
Total Other Funding Sources Requests: $8,549,000-8,699,000.
Total All Requests: $9,548,257-9,698,257.
r
r
MEMORANDUM
TO:
John D'Agostino, Town Manager
FROM:
Robert S. Mangiaratti, Town Counsel
RE:
Tweeter Center Entertainment License
DATE:
April 4, 2001
(
At your request, I reviewed a letter dated April 3, 2001 to you from Richard S. Novak,
Esq., counsel for the Tweeter Center. In this memo, I shall not address each of Mr.
Novak's points. However, I shall provide answers to some of the legal questions raised by
his letter.
Question #1: Are the Selectmen obligated to grant an entertainment license to the
Tweeter Center?
Answer #1: The selectmen have discretion in making a decision to grant an
entertainment license. M.G.L. c. 140, § 183A states:
r-
"Wzthin farty-ftœ days fol/owing roceipt of an applif:ation far a liœnse under this soction the
licensing authariti£s may (a) grant a liœnse or (b) shall pruvide the op¡xmunity far a
hearing an the applicatinn by written notiœ to the app/iatnt giœn seœn days prior to the
hearing date. »
r Thus, the selectmen have the option of granting a license or scheduling a hearing with due
notice to the applicant. The statute goes on to state that within thirty days following the
date of hearing "the liœnsing authariti£s shall (a) grant the liœnse or (b}ieliver to the applicant wri1ten
notiœ denying the liœnse and stating in writing the reasons far denial" Thus, it is clear that the
statute does not obligate the selectmen to grant a license. However, if a license is denied,
then the selectmen must provide the applicant with a written statement of reasons for
denial.
Qµestion #2:
What are the issues that the selectmen must consider in making a
decision on an entertainment license?
,-.-
Answer #2: The selectmen must detennine whether the proposed licensed activity
can be conducted in a way that will not " adœrsely afJea publii: health, safety or ord£r." Before
issuing a license, the selectmen should deem that concerts will be conducted in a manner so
as to:
{a}protø:t tmpIoyæs, patrons, and ~ of the puIiii: inside or outside the prrmises firm
dismptiœ anluct,.frrm criminal activity, or .frrm health, safety or fire hazards; (b) preœnt
an unreasonalie incrræe in the lecxJ of noise in the amt CtJUS«l by the liœnæi activity or
CtIJI.S«i by patrons entering or leaving the prrmises; or (c) preœnt an ~k incrrase
in the kœ1 of pø:kstridn or uhiaJm trajfr in the area of the prrmises or an unreasonalie
incrrase in the ~ ofvchirks to læ parlæd in the amt of the prrmises.
Question #3: Do the selectmen have authority to impose conditions and promulgate
regulations for an entertainment license?
Answer #3: The statute specifically authorizes selectmen to impose conditions and
make regulations. It states:
r-
In arder to preserœ and prfX«:t the public health, safety, and arder as a[aresaid, the liœnsing
authariti£s may plaœ wndiJions upon the liœnse and prrmulgaœ rnks and rer¡¡dations far
sUÓJ liœnses.
r
Question #4: Can an applicant seek. judicial review of the selectmen's decision on an
entertainment license?
Answer #4: An applicant dissatisfied with the decision of the local board may seek
relief in superior court by an action in the nature of certiorari.
Question #5: What is the standard of review that a court would apply in reviewing a
decision of the selectmen on an entertainment license?
Answer #5: In a certiorari action, a reviewing court would set aside the decision of
a local board only for an error of law or for an arbitrary or capricious abuse of discretion.
Caswell v. Licensing Com'n. for Brockton 387 Mass. 864,·878 (1994). The court will only
act to prevent manifest injustice to the material rights of a plaintiff. Mutray'v. Second Dist.
Ct. of E. Middlesex 389 Mass. 508, 511 (1983). To show that a decision is arbitrary and
r capricious the applicant must show that the challengd ac/:ÍD1. is not rriat«l to the purfXJses of the
Iøgj,slation autharizing lÍl::e'r1æs. Rose v. Board of Selectmen of Falmouth 36 Mass. App. Ct. 34,
39 (1994).
~
Question #6:
selectmen?
Answer #6: M.G.L. c. 140, 183C is the statute which sets criminal penalties for
operating without an entertainment license and for violation of a condition of a license. It
empowers a court to punish a violator by a.fine of not rœre than one thousand doUars, or by
irnpr'isJnment fur not rœre than one year or by roth. This statute is not applicable to fmes imposed
by the selectmen pursuant to their own regulations. Payment of a fme under the
regulations would be a condition to continuation of the licensed activity. If the fme is not
paid the selectmen's only recourse is to revoke the license.
Does M.G.L. c. 140, 183C prohibit a fme structure as proposed by the
r Question #7: Can the Selectmen deem the limousine drop off service as the
operation of an open air parking facility subject to licensing under M. G.L. c. 148, §56?
Answer #7: Under the statute, selectmen may license any entity engaged in the
business of conducting or maintaining an open air parking space. I believe that the
selectmen could reasonably detennine that the charging of a fee for special limousine
parking spaces is the operation of a parking business. The fact that the special limousine
lots are appurtenant to a concert facility does not necessarily exclude them from the open
air parking space statute. See Coolcqr v.Bettigole 1 Mass. App. Ct. 515 (1973) and Bettigole
v. Cio/ Council of Springfield 1 Mass App. Ct. 171 (1973).
r
r
TOWN OF MANSFIELD
fy2002 04/0212001
BUDGET CHANGES
Account # Title Old Amount New Amount Change Dept Change
r- Revenue
0101-4298 Tweeter 0.00 24,000.00 24,000.00
0101-4324 0070 8,SOO,OOO.00 8,545,138.00 45,138.00
0101-43 lottery 1,553,000.00 1,546,916.00 (6,084.00)
Hercules assmnt 0.00 25,477.51 25,477.51
0101-4970 ofs-betterments 0.00 21,223.00 21,223.00
0.00
6001-4210 sewer user 1,280,507.63 1 ,258,211.29 (22,296.34)
Revenue Increasel-Decrease 87,458.17 87,458.17
5311A Selectmen-122 8,000.00 3,150.00 4,850.00
5381 spec serv 26,560.00 0.00 26,560.00
31,410.00
5193 Town Manager-123 850.00 700.00 150.00
40,000.00 0.00 40,000.00 40,150.00
Reserve FD-131 200,000.00 150,000.00 50,000.00
50,000.00
5111 Data Finance-133 63,760.00 64,174.00 -414.00
5114 127,472.00 122,913.16 4,558.84
5193 longevity 2,300.00 1,850.00 450.00
4,594.84
5111 Accounting-134 53,294.31 61,039.00 -7,744.69
5113 sb 5112 35,395.64 34,528.97 866.67
r 5114 16,822.00 15,500.00 1,322.00
5193 longevity 537.50 375.00 162.50
5310 ac:c:tg/audit 21,500.00 20,000.00 1,500.00
-3,893.52
5111 Assesor-137 50,000.00 50,052.00 -52.00
???step 5112 33,744.05 34,731.01 -986.96
5114 44,854.75 32,313.00 12,541.75
5193 1111? 612.50 687.50 -75.00
5731
11,427.79
5114 Personnel-152 12,730.00 0.00 12,730.00
5301 prof tech 15,250.00 0.00 15,250.00
5341 teleph 750.00 0.00 750.00
5421 off supp 600.00 0.00 600.00
5511 books 1,050.00 0.00 1,050.00
5731 prof dev 650.00 300.00 350.00
5880 Off equip 2,600.00 0.00 2,600.00
33,330.00
5111 MIS-154 92,105.90 55,698.00 36,407.90
5113 0.00 21,000.00 -21,000.00
5242 rep equip 35,525.00 20,000.00 15,525.00
5301 profltech 268,774.00 46,000.00 222,774.00
5315 training 9,900.00 6,000.00 3,900.00
5341 teleph 470.00 1,200.00 -730.00
5581 opp supp 7,100.00 6,300.00 800.00
5731 prof dev 400.00 2,000.00 -1,600.00
5880 off equip 44,550.00 32,000.00 12,550.00
268,626.90
5111 Clerk-161 43,618.17 45,917.00 -2,298.83
r 5112 29,612.50 31,678.33 -2,065.83
5121 temp 3,000.00 2,000.00 1,000.00
5193 longevity 300.00 375.00 -75.00
-3,439.66
5113 Conservation-171 50,549.34 53,441.37 -2,892.03
5193 longevity 350.00 425.00 -75.00
-2,967.03
5111 Planning-172 63,583.60 68,234.00 -4,650.40
??? Step 5114 30,959.58 32,854.99 -1,895.41
5343 print 300.00 100.00 200.00
-6,345.81
5114 ZBA-173 6,550.00 7,000.00 -450.00
,,- -450.00
5343 Boards/Committees-179 0.00
5345 0.00
5511 0.00
0.00
5301 Redev Auth-1 SO 25,000.00 0.00 25,000.00
25,000.00
5741 Insurance-190 122,975.00 120,000.00 2,975.00
574211ab 45,000.00 42,000.00 3,000.00
5743 surety 1,500.00 1,200.00 300.00
5746 self 10,000.00 7,500.00 2,500.00
8,775.00
5111 Public Buildings-192 51,772.00 59,290.00 -7,518.00
5114 seel 15,000.00 0.00 15,000.00
5191 meals 1 00.00 30.00 70.00
5270 rent 40,995.00 11,995.00 29,000.00
5295 maint cont 22,450.00 20,210.00 2,240.00
58xx phone 0.00 30,000.00 -30,000.00
5880 off equip 9,000.00 7,500.00 1,500.00
10,292.00
5151 Beneftts-194(health) 3,770,000.00 3,675,000.00 95,000.00
5782 staff recr-in 152 8,000.00 0.00 8,000.00
103,000.00
5116 Police-210 1,049,170.00 1,010,598.00 38,572.00
5113 tech 62,655.00 62,573.00 82.00
5131 162,550.00 136,300.00 26,250.00
5132 62,500.00 50,000.00 12,500.00
5193 Iongvt 10,550.00 12,575.00 -2,025.00
5242 rep equip 7,500.00 5,000.00 2,500.00
5270 rent 2,000.00 1,250.00 750.00
r 5421 off supp 5,000.00 3,500.00 1,500.00
5450 oust supp 900.00 500.00 400.00
5481 motor fuel 40,300.00 35,000.00 5,300.00
5850 non-veh equ 21,000.00 20,000.00 1,000.00
5870 vehicles 144,000.00 119,000.00 25,000.00
111,829.00
5117 Flre-220 1,032,891.00 891,932.00 140,959.00
5112 306,378.00 309,210.00 -2,832.00
5131 106,090.00 127,515.00 -21,425.00
5132 158,000.00 159,310.00 -1,310.00
5136 holiday 95,500.00 86,112.00 9,388.00
5141 63,253.00 65,353.00 -2,100.00
5192 uniform 14,400.00 12,800.00 1,600.00
5194 stipends 7,400.00 10,900.00 -3,500.00
5195 career inc 24,000.00 22,500.00 1,500.00
5270 rentals 800.00 500.00 300.00
5295 maint cont 12,500.00 10,500.00 2,000.00
5315 training 4,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00
5582 uniforms 23,000.00 24,600.00 -1,600.00
5782 staff rec 2,000.00 1,000.00 1,000.00
5850 nonveh 30,000.00 33,000.00 -3,000.00
5880 office equip 4,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00
124,980.00
5117 Ambulance-230 166,335.00 180,616.00 -14,281.00
5132 unschld ot 42,436.00 22,436.00 20,000.00
5194 103,750.00 99,850.00 3,900.00
5582 uniforms 250.00 0.00 250.00
5782 staff rec 7,000.00 0.00 7,000.00
,'-'- 16,869.00
5116 Dlspatch-240 259,039.00 280,696.00 -21,657.00
5136 holiday 16,845.00 2,000.00 14,845.00
5192 uniform allow 3,600.00 4,050.00 -450.00
5193 Iongvt 700.00 1,225.00 -525.00
5731 prof dav 2,SOO.OO 1,000.00 1,SOO.OO
5850 nonveh 8,000.00 700.00 7,300.00
1,013.00
5111 Building Insp-251 61,837.57 72,016.00 -10,178-43
tweeter 0.00 6,000.00 -6,000.00
5113A 56,539.35 62,380.76 -5,841 -41
5114 61,019.44 67,805.71 -6,786.27
5242 rap equip 400.00 200.00 200.00
5315 seminars 2,500.00 2,050.00 450.00
r 5482 veh suppl 1,500.00 800.00 700.00
5511 books 1,127.00 800.00 327.00
5731 prof dev 600.00 1,050.00 -450.00
-27,579.11
5315 MEMA-291 0.00
5880 off equip 150.00 0.00 150.00
150.00
School Salaries 22,272,733.00 21,986,233.00 286,500.00
SchoolExp 5,664,393.00 5,471,160.00 193,233.00 479,733.00
5111 Engineering-410 71,322.19 71,651.00 -328.81
5113 Engineering-410 85,739.91 47,657.00 38,082.91
5114 29,064.16 32,159.99 ..:s,795.83
5193 longevity 300.00 375.00 -75.00
5482 veh suppl 900.00 600.00 300.00
5582 uniforms 750.00 500.00 250.00
5720 out st tray 500.00 100.00 400.00
5731 prof dev 900.00 600.00 300.00
35,133.27
5112 DPW Aclmin-42O 43,497.00 45,917.00 -2,420.00
5114 seclcler 64,843.00 67,334.13 -2,491.13
5193 Iongev 1,475.00 1,625.00 -150.00
-5,061.13
5111 DPW-421 52,899.00 60,609.00 -7,710.00
5114 15,000.00 0.00 15,000.00
5191 meal allow 3,000.00 2,500.00 500.00
5241 rep bldg 5,900.00 3,000.00 2,900.00
r 5451 groundskpg supp 38,000.00 30,000.00 8,000.00
5533 construtn mat 155,500.00 55,500.00 100,000.00
5850 non veh equip 31,300.00 9,500.00 21,800.00
140,490.00
5840 Airport-4Eì2 12,000.00 10,000.00 2,000.00
2,000.00
5111 Health-512 51,286.00 55,331.00 -4,045.00
5114 22,710.53 23,153.00 -442.47
5193 700.00 850.00 -150.00
-4,637.47
5343 Right to Know-519 0.00
0.00
5111 COA-541 47,557.00 55,600.00 -8,043.00
5112 supvsal 29,613.00 31,678.33 -2,065.33
5113 77,916.00 56,430.98 21,485.02
5193 longev 1,210.00 1,650.00 -440.00
5212 elec 9,775.00 4,500.00 5,275.00
5231 683.00 1,000.00 -317.00
5710 0.00
15,894.69
5193 Veterans-543 0.00
0.00
5112 Social Services-549 14,648.00 14,619.00 29.00
5381 7,000.00 5,500.00 1,500.00
1,529.00
5114 MBC-550 18,613.49 19,973.00 -1,359.51
-1,359.51
5111 library-610 45,203.88 57,169.00 -11,965.12
5113 tech 164,691.26 153,223.18 11,468.08
r 5141 0.00 1,621.00 -1,621.00
5193 11111111 1,150.00 1,300.00 -150.00
5212 elec 22,000.00 10,000.00 12,000.00
5215 heat 3,125.00 3,500.00 -375.00
5231 sewlwater 400.00 450.00 -50.00
9,306.96
5111 Park & Rec-620 48,419.00 51,970.00 -3,551.00
5193 longev 350.00 425.00 -75.00
5582 350.00 600.00 -250.00
-3,876.00
5241 Historica/-650 0.00 3,000.00 -3,000.00
5343 0.00 200.00 -200.00
r 5431 0.00 1,500.00 -1,500.00
5731 0.00 70.00 -70.00
-4,770.00
Debt-712-Short term 0.00 0.00
5620 County tax 255,985.00 279,688.00 -23,703.00 -23,703.00
5691 StateJCty-SRPEDD 2,611.00 2,676.23 -65.23 -65.23
5299 Spec Art-950-Haz Waste 0.00 15,000.00 -15,000.00 -15,000.00
5314 Eng-Hercules 0.00 50,895.01 -50,895.01 -50,895.01
5322 SE Regional 422,600.00 274,464.00 148,136.00 148,136.00
19402 overlay 600,000.00 500,000.00 100,000.00 100,000.00
019505-5963 CIP 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 0.00
telephone lines-town 11,325.00
telephone lines-school 7,215.00 18,540.00
5111 Sewer-60440 56,642.00 65,740.00 -9,098.00
5112 172,247.00 156,639.66 15,607.34
5115 378,978.00 349,691.00 29,287.00
5144 scada 1,500.00 15,000.00 -13,500.00
604409 0.00 22,296.34
Expense DecreaseJ-Increase 1,660,464.31 1,660,464.31
Net Change 1,747,922.48
Original Budget Shortfall 2,153,209.58
Remaining Shortfall 405,287.10
r
WATER ENTERPRISE
Revenue 2,577,047.02 2,342,726.02 234,321.00
Total Decrease 234,321.00
Expenses
5111 mgmt 66,943.00 67,312.00 (369.00)
5112 SUpaN 62,713.00 63,530.00 (817.00)
5301 profltech 69,400.00 85,600.00 -16,200.00
5343 printing' 2,807.00 1,100.00 1,707.00
5878 265,000.00 15,000.00 250,000.00
Total Decrease 234,321.00
r
2002 Projection versus Request 4/2/01
A B C D E
2001 2002 2002 (C· A) (C·B) (E/B)
Proposed Projection Requested % Increase $ Difference % Increase
r 02R vs 01 02R vs 02P 02R vs 02P
11ectmen
Other Expenses 100,250.00 106,265.00 86,000.00 ·14.21% (20,265.00) ·20.21%
Total 100,250.00 106,265.00 86,000.00 ·14.21% (20,265.00) ·20.21%
Town Manager
Personal Services 478,287.02 492,635.63 188,392.04 ·60.61 % (304,243.59) ·63.61 %
Other Expenses 47,850.00 50,721.00 54,340.00 13.56% 3,619.00 7.56%
Total 526,137.02 543,356.63 242,732.04 ·53.87% (300,624.59) ·57.14%
Data/Finance
Personal Services 221,762.62 228,415.50 232,969.92 5.05% 4,554.42 2.05%
Other Expenses 62,665.00 66,424.90 62,713.00 0.08% (3,711.90) ·5.92%
Capital Outlay 1,000.00 1,060.00 1,000.00 0.00% (60.00) ·6.00%
Total 285,427.62 295,900.40 296,682.92 3.94% 782.52 0.27%
Accountant
Personal Services 96,437.50 99,330.63 111,442.97 15.56% 12,112.35 12.56%
Other Expenses 21,910.00 23,224.60 23,625.00 7.83% 400.40 1.83%
Total 118,347.50 122,555.23 i35,067.97 14.13% 12,512.75 10.57%
Assessor
Personal Services 120,167.50 123,772.53 137,441.51 14.37% 13,668.99 11.37%
Other Expenses 35,700.00 37,842.00 23,900.00 ·33.05% (13,942.00) ·39.05%
Total 155,867.50 161,614.53 161,341.51 3.51% (273.02) ·0.18%
Data Processing
~rsonal Services 51,000.00 52,530.00 76,698.00 50.39% 24,168.00 47.39%
.her Expenses 103,140.00 109,328.40 85,100.00 ·17.49% (24,228.40) ·23.49%
Capital Outlay 27,900.00 29,574.00 32,000.00 14.70% 2,426.00 8.70%
Total 182,040.00 191,432.40 193,798.00 6.46% 2,365.60 1.30%
Town Clerk
Personal Services 95,576.92 98,444.23 105,707.93 10.60% 7,263.70 7.60%
Other Expenses 33,529.00 35,540.74 21,537.00 ·35.77% (14,003.74) ·41.77%
Total 129,105.92 133,984.97 127,244.93 ·1.44% (6,740.04) ·5.22%
Conservation
Personal Services 50,197.60 51,703.53 58,726.37 16.99% 7,022.84 13.99%
Other Expenses 2,800.00 2,968.00 2,800.00 0.00% (168.00) ·6.00%
Total 52,997.60 54,671.53 61,526.37 16.09% 6,854.84 12.93%
Planning Board
Personal Services 92,211.76 94,978.11 108,451.96 17.61% 13,473.85 14.61 %
Other Expenses 3,550.00 3,763.00 5,350.00 50.70% 1,587.00 44.70%
Capital Outlay 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 95,761.76 98,741.11 113,801.96 18.84% 15,060.85 15.73%
Zoning Board of A
Personal Services 5,000.00 5,150.00 7,000.00 40.00% 1,850.00 37.00%
Other Expenses 750.00 795.00 750.00 0.00% (45.00) -6.00%
Total 5,750.00 5,945.00 7,750.00 34.78% 1,805.00 31.39%
Boards/Commissions
~rsonal Services 1,200.00 1,236.00 2,000.00 66.67% 764.00 63.67%
her Expenses 7,553.00 8,006.18 7,603.00 0.66% (403.18) ·5.34%
lotal 8,753.00 9,242.18 9,603.00 9.71% 360.82 4.12%
, .,.... . A B C D E
"2001 "2002 "2002 (C·A) (C·B) (E/S)
Proposed Projection Requested % Increase $ Difference % Increase
D.P.W. Administration
Personal Services 182,034.00 187,495.02 201,675.13 10.79% 14,180.11 7.79%
~her Expenses 1,022,637.00 1,096,977.22 1,076,969.00 5.31% (20,008.22) -1.96%
tal 1,204,671.00 1,284,472.24 1,278,644.13 6.14% (5,828.11) ·0.48%
Highway
Personal Services 603,367.00 621,468.01 667,428.00 10.62% 45,959.99 7.62%
Other Expenses 310,360.00 328,981.60 406,870.00 31.10% 77 ,888.40 25.10%
Capital Outlay 22,000.00 23,320.00 9,500.00 ·56.82% (13,820.00) -62.82%
Total 935,727.00 973,769.61 1,083,798.00 15.82% 110,028.39 11.76%
Winter Malnt.
Personal Services 77,360.00 77,360.00 77,360.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00%
Other Expenses 110,780.00 110,780.00 110,780.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00%
Total 188,140.00 188,140.00 188,140.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00%
Airport
Personal Services 1,600.00 1,648.00 1,600.00 0.00% (48.00) -3.00%
Other Expenses 10,000.00 10,600.00 10,000.00 0.00% (600.00) ·6.00%
Total 11,600.00 12,248.00 11,600.00 0.00% (648.00) ·5.59%
Sewer
Personal Services 586,875.00 604,481.25 669,748.66 14.12% 65,267.41 11.12%
Other Expenses 628,634.00 666,352.04 699,933.00 11.34% 33,580.96 5.34%
Capital Outlay 44,570.00 47,244.20 95,870.00 115.10% 48,625.80 109.10%
I nternal Services 477,473.00 506,121.38 543,524.00 13.83% 37,402.62 7.83%
Total 1,737,552.00 1,824,198.87 2,009,075.66 15.63% 184,876.79 10.64%
Health
~rsonal Services 70,448.24 72,561.69 79,334.00 12.61% 6,772.31 9.61%
her Expenses 23,521.00 24,932.26 23,821.00 1.28% (1,111.26) -4.72%
fotal 93,969.24 97,493.95 103,155.00 9.78% 5,661.05 6.02%
Right to Konw
Personal Services 3,000.00 3,090.00 3,000.00 0.00% (90.00) ·3.00%
Other Expenses 4.00 4.24 4.00 0.00% (0.24 ) ·6.00%
Total 3,004.00 3,094.24 3,004.00 0.00% (90.24) -3.00%
Senior Citizens
Personal Services 155,794.00 160,467.82 183,628.31 17.87% 23,160.49 14.87%
Other Expenses 42,355.00 44,896.30 39,359.00 -7.07% (5,537.30) ·13.07%
Total 198,149.00 205,364.12 222,987.31 12.54% 17,623.19 8.89%
Veterans Services
Personal Services 43,650.00 44,959.50 46,151.00 5.73% 1,191.50 2.73%
Other Expenses 40,500.00 42,930.00 40,655.00 0.38% (2,275.00) ·5.62%
Total 84,150.00 87,889.50 86,806.00 3.16% (1,083.50) -1.29%
Social Services
Personal Services 26,549.00 27,345.47 27,197.00 2.44% (148.47) ·0.56%
Other Expenses 13,707.00 14,529.42 12,707.00 -7.30% (1,822.42) -13.30%
Total 40,256.00 41,874.89 39,904.00 -0.87% (1,970.89) -4.90%
Library
Personal Services 269,488.00 277,572.64 293,718.18 8.99% 16,145.54 5.99%
Other Expenses 150,625.00 159,662.50 150,345.00 -0.19% (9,317.50) -6.19%
~tal 420,113.00 437,235.14 444,063.18 5.70% 6,828.04 1.63%
" - A B C D E
.
"2001 "2002 "2002 (C·A) (C·B) (E/B)
Proposed Projection Requested % Increase $ Difference % Increase
Redevelopment Authority
Other Expenses 1.00 1.06 0_00 ·100.00% (1.06) -106.00%
,rota I 1.00 1.06 0.00 ·100.00% (1.06) ·106.00%
Municipal Building Comm
Personal Services 17,545.00 18,071.35 19,973.00 13.84% 1,901.65 10.84%
Other Expenses 2,000.00 2,120.00 2,000.00 0.00% (120.00) ·6.00%
Total 19,545.00 20,191.35 21,973.00 12.42% 1,781.65 9.12%
Public Buildings
Personal Services 138,021.00 142,161.63 159,406.00 15.49% 17,244.37 12.49%
Other Expenses 215,705.00 228,647.30 217,409.00 0.79% (11,238.30) ·5.21%
Capital Outlay 71 ,400.00 75,684.00 109,600.00 53.50% 33,916.00 47.50%
Total 425,126.00 446,492.93 486,415.00 14.42% 39,922.07 9.39%
Pollee
Personal Services 1,971,050.45 2,165,411.96 2,119,189.00 7.52% (46,222.96) ·2.35%
Other Expenses 264,304.00 280,162.24 287,760.00 8.87% 7,597.76 2.87%
Capital Outlay 138,478.00 146,786.68 139,000.00 0.38% (7,786.68) ·5.62%
Total 2,373,832.45 2,592,360.88 2,545,949.00 7.25% (46,411.88) .1. 96%
Fire
Personal Services 1,706,449.00 1,858,742.47 1,910,739.00 11.97% 51,996.53 3.05%
Other Expenses 133,385.00 141,388.10 129,585.00 ·2.85% (11,803.10) ·8.85%
Capital Outlay 34,000.00 36,040.00 37,000.00 8.82% 960.00 2.82%
Total 1,873,834.00 2,036,170.57 2,077,324.00 10.86% 41,153.43 2.20%
Emergency Medical Sevice
Personal Services 297,270.00 306,188.10 302,902.00 1.89% (3,286.10) ·1.11%
¡-4ther Expenses 66,600.00 70,596.00 57,850.00 ·13.14% (12,746.00) ·19.14%
Jpital Outlay 9,000.00 9,540.00 5,000.00 ·44.44% (4,540.00) ·50.44%
Total 372,870.00 386,324.10 365,752.00 ·1.91% (20,572.10) ·5.52%
Dispatchers
Personal Service 338,094.00 348,236.82 362,231.00 7.14% 13,994.18 4.14%
Other Expenses 15,250.00 16,165.00 19,500.00 27.87% 3,335.00 21.87%
Capital Outlay 2,000.00 2,120.00 700.00 ·65.00% (1,420.00) ·71.00%
Total 355,344.00 366,521.82 382,431.00 7.62% 15,909.18 4.48%
Building Inspector
Personal Services 170,198.76 175,304.72 209,577.47 23.14% 34,272.75 20.14%
Other Expenses 9,956.00 10,553.36 10,405.00 4.51% (148.36) ·1.49%
Total 180,154.76 185,858.08 219,982.47 22.11% 34,124.39 18.94%
Emergency Management
Personal Services 3,000.00 3,090.00 3,000.00 0.00% (90.00) ·3.00%
Other Expenses 26,585.00 28,180.10 30,375.00 14.26% 2,194.90 8.26%
Capital Outlay 3,200.00 3,392.00 3,600.00 12.50% 208.00 6.50%
Total 32,785.00 34,662.10 36,975.00 12.78% 2,312.90 7.05%
Town Exp for Education
Personal Services 18,500.00 19,055.00 19,055.00 3.00% 0.00 0.00%
Total 18,500.00 19,055.00 19,055.00 3.00% 0.00 0.00%
Engineering
Personal Services 133,592.09 137,599.85 152,542.99 14.19% 14,943.14 11.19%
..Ather Expenses 18,275.00 19,371.50 18,025.00 ·1.37% (1,346.50) ·7.37%
)tal 151,867.09 156,971.35 170,567.99 12.31% 13,596.64 8.95%
A B C D E
. '2001 '2002 '2002 (C·A) (C·B) (E/B)
..
Proposed Projection Requested % Increase $ Difference % Increase
Parks/Recreation
Personal Services 87,625.00 90,253.75 97,051.00 10.76% 6,797.25 7.76%
,..-Qther Expenses 33,060.00 35,043.60 26,090.00 ·21.08% (8,953.60) ·27.08%
Jtal 120,685.00 125,297.35 123,141.00 2.04% (2,156.35) .1. 79%
Historical Commission
Other Expenses 4,770.00 5,056.20 4,770.00 0.00% (286.20) ·6.00%
Total 4,770.00 5,056.20 4,770.00 0.00% (286.20) ·6.00%
Reserve Fund 225,246.00 232,003.38 150,000.00 ·33.41 % (82,003.38) ·36.41 %
Personnel
Personal Services 0.00 0.00 0.00 #DIV to! 0.00 #DIV to!
Other Expenses 0.00 0.00 13,100.00 #DIV 10! 13,100.00 #DIV 10!
Capital 0.00 0.00 0.00 #DIV 10! 0.00 #DIV to!
Total 0.00 0.00 13,100.00 #DIV to! 13,100.00 #DIV /01
Arts Cultural Council
Other Expenses 0.00 0.00 6,866.00 #DIV/O! 6,866.00 #DIV 10!
Total 0.00 0.00 6,866.00 #DIV/O! 6,866.00 #DIV 10!
Sub-Town Oper 12,732,329.46 13,486,455.70 13,531,027.44 6.27% 44,571.74 0.35%
Insurance
Town Insurance 289,475.00 306,843.50 280,700.00 ·3.03% (26,143.50) ·9.03%
Employee Benefits 5,049,048.00 5,618,210.88 5,731,359.00 13.51% 113,148.12 2.24%
Total 5,338,523.00 5,925,054.38 6,012,059.00 12.62% 87,004.62 1.63%
Debt
~rincipal 3,510,500.76 3,405,000.00 3,410,000.00 ·2.86% 5,000.00 0.14%
terest 3,251,343.49 2,626,171.00 2,623,558.44 ·19.31% (2,612.56) ·0.08%
"otal 6,761,844.25 6,031,171.00 6,033,558.44 ·10.77% 2,387.44 0.04%
Debt-Sewer 227,472.23 225,955.00 225,004.86 ·1.08% (950.14) ·0.42%
State/County 328,848.95 338,714.42 363,639.23 10.58% 24,924.81 7.58%
CIP 633,000.00 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 57.98% 0.00 0.00%
Overlay 450,000.00 605,416.00 500,000.00 11.11% (105,416.00) ·23.43%
SE/Charter Sch 777,249.00 1,151,730.00 987,546.00 27.06% (164,184.00) ·21.12%
Other Articl es 160,393.76 150,546.26 240,441.27 49.91 % 89,895.01 56.05%
School 25,497,421.00 27,457,393.00 27,457,393.00 7.69% 0.00 0.00%
Sub Total 52,907,081.65 56,372,435.76 56,350,669.24 6.51% (21,766.52) ·0.04%
Telephone·Munic -11,325.00
Telephone-Schl -7,215.00 (18,540.00)
Sub Total 52,907,081.65 56,372,435.76 56,332,129.24 6.47% (40,306.52) -0.08%
Revenue 56,372,435.76 55,926,842.15 (445,593.61)
3% increase overall for personal services
6% increase overall for all other expense
12% increase health for two yrs, 6% next two years, 5 new employees in 02, 3 each add' yr added at top rate
Trash increase per DPW schedule-3% incr in tonnagelyr tipping fee 80 & 84 in 04 & 05
2 new police officers in 02,03 and 04·health & medicaid increased for same-Sargeant added in 02
r' new firefighters in 02 and 03 . .. .
..Jebt is actual plus 100,000 in sewer & gen fund for add'l borrowing
Charter based upon current enrollment·increased by school %increase per yr; SE up 3% per yr
Overlay per Assessor's schedule..2% of levy
CIP increased in 03, 04 & 05
/