Salem Observer : Salem, budget committee

Charter may oust budget group

Salem Editor — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 18:40:00 GMT

BY DERRICK PERKINS

Preliminary discussions over the role of a budget committee under any new form of town government have several members of the Charter Commission questioning the direction the panel has taken.

With the commission mulling the idea of putting an official ballot, town council style government before voters in March, a nonbinding motion to remove the institution of the budget committee from any future town charter passed on Thursday, Aug. 27. Though the motion will be revisited at the panel’s next meeting, commission member Stephen Campbell – who also holds a seat on the town’s Budget Committee – said he will not support a charter that does away with the committee.

One of the two members of the commission casting dissenting votes, Campbell said the move to relegate the committee to the trash bin did not come as a surprise to him.

“The majority of (the commission) wants to give more power to the Town Council than the selectmen currently have, and certainly not have to answer questions from a budget committee is one way of giving them more power,” Campbell said. “It’s part of what the majority wants. They’re taking power away from the voters. Whether you agree with it or disagree with it, the Budget Committee generates discussions. It brings out the information that wouldn’t come out in a selectmen’s meeting. It’s just one more way of giving the town council more power.”

According to Campbell, the town had been moving in the direction of giving more authority to the voters in recent years, opening up the seats on the planning and zoning boards as elected rather than appointed positions. Proposing and potentially adopting an official ballot, town council form of government flies in the face of that trend, Campbell said.

“When they took the vote to go forward with town council, official ballot idea, I told them I couldn’t support that. It’s just one aspect of taking power away from people. The whole town council takes power away from the people,” he said. “I’m campaigning against it.”

Selectman and commission member Patrick Hargreaves said he will be joining Campbell in writing a minority report when the panel puts its final recommendations before voters in March if the proposed charter embraces the town council idea.

“If they want to add more seats to the board of selectmen that’s OK, but not to go to a town council,” Hargreaves said. “I like my opinions. I like being able to stand in front of the boards and I like going to the town meeting. I like voicing my opinions.”

Commission Chairman Bob Campbell stressed that the vote to remove the budget committee was not final and that the issue would be revisited at the next meeting of the nine-member board on Sept. 17. Whether to include a budget committee or not in any proposed form of government for the town of Salem was just one in a list of questions the commission needs to answer, he said.

“It has to do with a lot of issues of how we are going to deal with the budget,” Campbell said. “We felt that those were related to a large degree and we needed to discuss them as a package ... I think the reason that we decided to put it off was because people felt there were other considerations that had to be linked with it. Whatever it was, it was not decisive and I wouldn’t want to convey the idea that it was decisive.”

New committee gets advice about state rules

Salem Editor — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 18:12:00 GMT

BY DERRICK PERKINS

The message members of the charter commission received from a representative of the local government center on July 9 was “curb your creativity.”

Attorney David Connell pointed to past attempts by towns and cities across the state to impose tax cap initiatives, term limits for elected officials and bring the school district in as a department of the municipal government as charter changes that have exceeded what is laid out in the state statutes and been subsequently struck down by the courts.

“Each of these cases where the court has struck down something in a charter, that was an opinion held by town council and reviewed by the attorney general and who both said it was OK. It’s far from clear even when you can hear from multiple people saying it’s OK,” Connell said. “A general observation is that the charter is not the place for detailed treatment of the structure of your future town government. That’s left for administrative code.”

Connell took questions from the nine-member commission on the different forms of municipal government available under state statute Thursday night, from a board of alderman and an elected mayor to a town council with an official ballot. Connell also ruled out any attempts by the commission to put both a proposal for a new charter on the March town meeting ballot and a series of amendments to the existing town charter.

“This commission as this commission has to present one document for a yes or no vote. It could contain any number of items which one at a time might be considered amendments,” he said. “While this commission is doing its task, the board of selectmen can say, ‘Let’s throw on (the ballot) a few amendments.’”

His presentation sparked a three-hour debate between members of the commission over how much power any future legislative body that might replace the existing board of selectmen would wield relative to the voters or other boards and committees.

Commission Chairman Robert Campbell, a former selectman and current member of the Planning Board, spoke favorably of the town potentially adopting a town council with an official ballot.

“The official ballot with a town council would provide the structure for a good transition. Some people are comfortable having some control via the ballot and others would like to see us move toward a council or city (form of government),” he said. “The variation that is possible with the assignment of legislative power to either the ballot or the council allows making both parts of that comfortable and allows for a transition over time by simple amendment without having to redo the charter.”

Stephen Campbell, a member of the Budget Committee, disagreed and said he would oppose any attempts to make it easier for big ticket spending items – like a new police station – to gain approval.

“I want the decision-making in as many hands as possible. I do believe in checks and balances. I might elect somebody who I think is a great person and I can’t get rid of them for three years because they either changed their mind or lied to me,” he said. “ There is no magic in a city council or a town council ... I can’t do anything about D.C. I can hardly do anything about Concord. The only place where I can do anything is here.”

With no final decision on what direction the commission will take in pursuing a new charter, members plan to narrow down their ideas for the panel’s next meeting on July 23.

Known names take Charter Commission seats

Salem Editor — Wed, 20 May 2009 18:30:00 GMT

BY DERRICK PERKINS

Voters backed candidates with a background in local government for the Charter Commission, giving town employees and elected officials seats on the nine-member board on May 19.

The three members of the Board of Selectmen on the ballot, Patrick Hargreaves, Michael Lyons and Chairman Arthur Barnes, won their bids for a spot on the commission, along with longtime Budget Committee member Stephen Campbell and Robert Campbell, a member of the Planning Board.

Fire Chief Kevin Breen and Deputy Police Chief William Ganley were given the nod by residents at Tuesday’s polls.

Annette Cooke and Cathy Ann Stacey also took a seat each on the commission.

Approved in March by Town Meeting, the commission has been charged with making a range of potential recommendations to improve municipal government, from small changes to Salem’s charter to possibly replacing the Board of Selectmen with a town council.

The commission stems out of one of several recommendations the now defunct Charter Reform Committee gave selectmen last fall. Formed early in 2008 to study ways to make the municipal government more efficient, Committee Chairman Dan Norris told selectmen at the time that the current form of government had limited possible solutions.

With a population over 25,000, Salem is one of the largest communities in the state that retains the town meeting form of government.

Voters did not give the twothirds majority approval needed for the Canobie Phase II water and sewer project. Part of the project was in line to receive federal stimulus funds, but the tally of 508 for and 308 against was not enough to accept the deal.

The plan will not go forward at this time. Town officials will seek alternate funding to bring town water and sewer to the area.

Officials say water, sewer bond passes legal requirements for stimulus funds

Salem Editor — Wed, 13 May 2009 18:34:00 GMT

BY DERRICK PERKINS

Legal questions raised by at least one resident won’t sidetrack plans to use possible federal stimulus funds for the Canobie Lake Phase II project if voters approve the warrant article on May 19, according to town officials.

A 15-year member of the Budget Committee, Stephen Campbell has voiced concerns over a discrepancy between the way the warrant article for the $4.1 million project has been presented to voters and how the town has applied for funding from the 2009 American Recovering and Reinvestment Act.

The Canobie project is intended to improve drainage around the lake and upgrade local roads, as well as allow for the extension of municipal water and sewer piping into area neighborhoods.

While the warrant article includes the both the sewer and water work as part of one larger project, town officials filed separate applications under different categories for possible stimulus funding.

Though neither aspect of the project is currently eligible for stimulus funds, that may change as other municipalities decide whether or not to move forward with approved projects.

That could pose legal problems if only one portion of the work receives funding, according to Campbell.

“The real question is can they go forward at all with this project if they only get money for one (aspect of it)?” Campbell said. “If one project gets funding and one doesn’t, then only one can go forward.”

The sewer work is currently ranked 41st on the state’s priority list of clean water projects – eight spots shy of receiving funding – while the installation of a water main at that site is ranked 234th on the state’s list of drinking water projects and well below the cutoff for funding.

Campbell believes town officials may have muddied the water further by wrapping both projects together on the ballot rather than separate them and use money from the water and sewer unreserved fund or go through the traditional route to hold a special town meeting.

Though the recently passed Senate Bill 39 allows municipalities to hold special town meetings without going through the courts for projects involving stimulus funding, Campbell said moving forward with both projects – were one to get stimulus funding and not the other – could be a violation even with voter approval.

Town Manager Jonathan Sistare said both the wording of the warrant article and plans to fund the overall project have been cleared by the town counsel and the town’s bond counsel, citing the broad language of SB39 as the reason, and approved by the state’s Department of Revenue.

According to Sistare, though the town has always considered the Canobie Lake water and sewer as a single entity, two applications were filed for stimulus funding because the different aspects of the project fell under different categories. Were either aspect of the project to receive stimulus funding and get a two-thirds majority vote at the May 19 special town meeting, the town would move forward with the work, he said.

“What we wanted to do is to give the town the most flexibility and put forward both parts of these projects, and if we get approved for it that allows us to bond (the remainder) and not use cash reserves,” Sistare said. “There are a lot of unknowns and a hundred different questions about what can be done and what can’t be done with two parts of a project as we have. No one really has the answers and we’re going with the best judgement we were given.”

The town could stand to receive about $1.49 million in federal stimulus funds for the sewer portion of the project, with the remainder of the cost bonded, according to Sistare.

But, if neither aspect of the project receives stimulus funding or voters reject the warrant article, then the project will not go forward, he said.

State officials with the department revenue said they will be reviewing documents submitted by municipalities like Salem on a case by case basis to ensure that the process to receive and implement stimulus funding has been followed correctly.

Salem Selectmen to put $2.4 million bridge work article before voters

Salem Editor — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 01:27:00 GMT

BY DERRICK PERKINS

Selectmen are asking voters to approve the replacement of two town bridges in March after adding the multimillion- dollar bond article to the Town Meeting warrant on Monday, Jan. 12.

On the state’s municipal red list since late 2007, the Lawrence Road Bridge spanning the Spicket River and the Cluff Crossing Road Bridge over Policy Brook could be replaced at a cost of $2,394,000 if voters approve the bond article in March.

Each bridge is eligible for up to 80 percent reimbursement from the state through the Department of Transportation’s municipal aid program, according to Robert Puff, town engineer.

Selectmen said both bridges had also been included on the town’s list of “shovel-ready” projects as the state prepares for a possible financial infusion from President-elect Obama’s proposed $775 billion economic stimulus package.

“The (stimulus package) is a trump card that we don’t know,” said Selectman Everett McBride. “I think there is going to be money available.”

While the state’s reimbursement funds would not become available until 2014 for the Lawrence Road Bridge and 2015 for the Cluff Crossing Bridge, Town Manager Jonathan Sistare urged selectmen to move ahead as quickly as possible.

According to Sistare, were federal funds from the economic stimulus package to come to New Hampshire, both of the projects might jump up on the state’s list, resulting in a full 80 percent reimbursement with a shorter wait then currently anticipated.

Though several selectmen indicated that they agreed with Town Finance Director Jane Savastano’s recommendation to ask voters for a 10- year bond vs. a 20-year bond, the board opted to hold off on making a final decision at the Jan. 12 meeting.

Designs for both replacement bridges have already been completed. According to Puff, the proposed Lawrence Road Bridge would raise the structure’s elevation and widen it to the approximate limits of the natural river bank, allowing floodwaters to pass under rather than over the roadway as occurred during the 2006 Mother’s Day floods.

Weight restrictions are currently enforced on both bridges – a maximum of 13 tons for the Lawrence Road Bridge and 10 tons for the Cluff Crossing Road Bridge – since state engineers have rated the structures deficient.

This past summer, public safety officials called on selectmen to tackle the problem after fire apparatus were restricted from using the bridges during emergencies. School officials have had to reroute buses around the bridges, as well.

Nonunion raises on Salem budget this year

Salem Editor — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 19:50:00 GMT

BY DERRICK PERKINS

For one member of the Budget Committee, an attempt to add a 3 percent raise for a dozen top town officials in the proposed operating budget for 2009 is all about “sour grapes.”

Town Manager Jonathan Sistare has taken criticism from Stephen Campbell, a member for the Budget Committee for 14 years, for breaking with Salem’s tradition by placing the raises for 12 town employees into the operating budget rather than putting them on a warrant article to be voted on during the upcoming Town Meeting in March. Last March, voters failed to pass a warrant article that included raises for those same 12 nonunion positions within the town.

“He’s going against the way we’ve treated this stuff in the past. Its all sour grapes because he didn’t get a raise,” Campbell said. “Sour grapes, that’s what it comes down to.”

As town manager, Sistare, along with the town manager assistant, human resources director, human resources assistant, town clerk, tax collector, finance director, community development director, director of engineering, public works director and fire and police chiefs would receive the 3 percent raise if the operating budget passes.

“It certainly goes against the Town Meeting idea,” Campbell said. “There’s a lot of people in Salem that aren’t getting raises this year because their companies aren’t giving out raises. Why are they the only ones that are guaranteed a raise and the voters can’t do anything about it? Are they so special? It’s just not right.”

Sistare said that the break in tradition has come both as a way to remove politics from the day-to- day operation of the town and to alleviate salary compression – which occurs when subordinate employees receive raises while their supervisors do not, closing the gap between their salaries.

“The primary purpose of a town or city having a manager is to allow the day-to-day operations to be run by a nonpartisan professional who is not influenced or interfered with by local politics,” Sistare said. “There are too many employees of this town who feel interfered with or influenced by politics. It is one of my goals to eliminate that as it does this town no good to have that kind of atmosphere.”

According to Sistare, the town manager statute – adopted by Salem in 1960s – gives him the authority to set and manage the wages of town employees, as well as hirings and firings. Salem is one of the only towns in the area that allows residents to vote on cost-of-living adjustments for town employees, he said.

“Those (employees) who wish to bargain collectively through a union know that their contract cost implications are, by law, subject to a vote of the legislative body. Again, that is the law and that is known by all parties involved,” he said. “ The nonunion employees do not have any of the bargaining rights of a collective bargaining unit and are thus left more vulnerable to management decisions.”

Sistare said he had received the support of the majority of selectmen to put the raises into the operating budget and did not expect a backlash from voters or elected town officials going forward. If the board and the Budget Committee approve the operating budget, taxpayers will get a chance to weigh in sometime in February. If the budget passes as is, Sistare and the other 11 nonunion town employees will receive their raises starting on Jan. 1.

“You can’t vote yes or no on these raises. You get to vote on the operating budget. You can’t just vote on the raises. It goes against the way these raises have been treated in the past,” said Campbell, who remains adamantly against the decision to put the raises into the operating budget. “They’ve changed the rules because they didn’t like the way people voted. I’m certainly not going to approve (the budget).”

$33 Million budget proposed in Salem

Salem Editor — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:04:00 GMT

BY DERRICK PERKINS

Selectman reviewed for the first time the proposed $33 million operating budget that covers the cost of leasing five new vehicles, roadwork and bridgework in the 2009 fiscal year.

The proposed budget, reviewed Monday, Aug. 25, comes in at 5.22 percent higher than last year. The tax increase will be 13 cents per $1,000 assessed property valuation, a 2.79 percent across the board increase on the tax rate over the 2008 budget.

Sistare is asking for a 3.77 percent increase in the general fund, up from 3.42 percent in 2008. About 60 percent of the approximately $27 million general fund will go toward public safety, which includes the purchase of a fire engine and fire rescue vehicle. The town is also looking to purchase a vacuum truck, sweeper truck and a dump truck. By leasing all five vehicles, Sistare is hoping to shave 24 cents off the tax rate over the course of 2009.

Finance Director Jane Savastano also advised that the fire rescue vehicles will require another $15,000 in additional costs for equipment.

At just over $5 million, proposed work on the roads around Canobie Lake, including sewer and water installation as well as drainage and road work, is the most expensive item on the proposed budget. The second phase of improvements will spread over two years as a proposed bond. Without bonding, Sistare estimates the work would cost taxpayers 39 cents on the tax rate, and it would more than double water and sewer rates in town.

Also included in the budget is a second bond for three of the red-listed bridges in town – the Cluff Crossing, Lawrence Road and Pelham Road bridges – at a total of $1,991,000, but with no financial impact for the town until 2010. If the bridgework were to go ahead without being bonded, Sistare estimates taxpayers would feel a 43-cent increase.

Funding has also been set aside for a new $300,000 computer system for the Police Department, road improvement and drainage development, as well as engineering costs for the replacement of the North Main Street bridge in the coming year.

Savastano pointed to an annual savings of $225,000 in personnel changes, a figure reflected in the 2009 budget and due to what Sistare called a “pseudohiring freeze” that left town positions unfilled as they opened up over the past year.

Sistare has also proposed the town re-establish the recreation revolving fund at a sum of $100,000, which he said will allow recreation director Chris Dillon more flexibility to run programs in the future.

Charter reform may be in Salem’s future

Salem Editor — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:52:00 GMT

BY JIM DEVINE

Selectmen voted to create a charter reform committee but plans for the panel have yet to be nailed down.

In a unanimous vote on Monday, April 14, selectmen approved a proposal by Selectman Michael Lyons to create a seven- person panel to investigate the town’s governing charter while assessing other possible options.

Four seats of the committee will be made up of representatives of the Board of Selectmen, the Budget Committee, the School Board and the Capital Improvement Plan Committee. Selectmen will appoint three citizens who are not currently serving on other major boards or committees to make up the remaining spots on the panel, selectmen said.

While the charter committee was originally proposed to have only five members with one citizen- at-large position, the number was boosted to assist in the large task of researching the town’s government to recommend improvements. The only decision put off by selectmen were the definitive directions in three areas where the Charter Reform Committee would investigate.

The first may be to correct the questioned status of the Municipal Budget Committee, which Town Manager Jonathan Sistare said may not be sanctioned under the state statute that provides Salem’s charter.

Sistare said he was awaiting further direction from the state Deptartment of Revenue Administration for recommendation on the Budget Committee clarification and any suggested areas to improve the charter.

The second purpose, supported by Lyons, is to lower the bond approval threshold from two-thirds to a three-fifths majority. Lyons said he would not hide his intentions to help the town address needed capital improvements and infrastructure demands. “We have serious infrastructure problems that we are not addressing. I’ll make no bones about it,” Lyons said.

In four years, two police station bond articles and a bond article for town-wide bridge repairs were rejected by voters because majority approval did not reach 67 percent.

Selectmen may also direct the charter reform committee to consider the presentation of formally elected charter commission that may take the town’s government in any direction.

Patrick McDougall, of 11 Tiffany Road, pleaded to selectmen to not direct the town to a city form of government.

A former resident of Methuen, Mass., McDougall said he moved to Salem five years ago to live in a town where voters had a greater say in the government.

“If this town becomes a city, I will pack up my things and move my family out of town and will encourage others to do so,” he said.

Final directions for the charter committee are to be determined at the board’s next meeting on April 28.