Budget Committee Meeting September 9, 2026

Speakers are labeled SPEAKER_N. This transcript is machine-generated.

Recording

Okay, good evening everyone. Um, welcome
to the
uh September 9th meeting of the New
London Budget Committee and uh welcome
to everyone who is here and Kim
especially gets the prize for hardship
duty due to the fact that she's crippled
>> but in recovery.
>> For picking me up.
>> All right, so prizes are awarded. Um,
tonight's agenda just I'd like to review
it very quickly with everyone here. Um,
we have two sets of minutes to review
and adopt July 8th, July 29th. Uh, one
of those will be a little bit more
cumbersome than the other, I think. Uh,
was hoping Rich was going to be here for
a little selectman report. um want to
talk about the status of the
appropriation request process and format
that we developed and was submitted to
the select board for their consideration
which Chris did. He can comment a little
bit about that as well. Um we were going
to do a high level review of FY2026
but after convening with Lynn um we need
to take a little longer to get some um
accuracy to those. We'll let her comment
on that when we come to the in the
agenda. I have put forward to you a
draft
one more time with passion uh for a
committee meeting schedule and I've
taken the notes that Ashley shared with
this committee relative to key dates and
put them in this schedule so we can see
the entirety and the timeline. Um Karen,
uh John and John Ziggler will give us an
update on the government's document. uh
we'll ask for public input uh on any
matters on the agenda and any other
matter that may be desired to be
presented to us and then other business
if there is any. So without further ado,
I'd like us to turn to the meeting
minutes of July 8th
and I want to propose a method of doing
this. Um just to step back generally to
say to you all um we're working really
hard to get our minutes posted. Hi Rich.
Uh get our minutes posted in a timely
fashion which we are required to do so
within five working days of the meeting.
So we have a little bit of time in
between the actual meeting and that 5day
period to review and make sure they
reflect accurately the the meeting and
then those are posted for uh public view
and access access and view viewing. Um,
additionally, our minutes are gonna
we're going to work hard to get them
salient, succinct, make sure the content
is accurate, and all votes are
accurately recorded. Um, and we're going
to try to avoid peripheral information
that has really no bearing on um either
a motion, a decision, or discussion. um
trying to get them as I said earlier
succinct but make sure they're accurate.
So we will work towards that in that
effort. The meeting minutes of July 8th
are going to require us to review them
together now and as we go through them I
would ask you to provide your input for
correction modification. I will record
those on my copy. We'll have them
recorded on the audio, of course, and
then we'll vote to adopt after we've
gotten everybody's input.
We okay with that?
>> Oh, I do need a motion to
>> and I need a second to
>> I'll second.
>> All right. Thank you, Lou. So,
if you will,
uh, thank you for the correction. Um, if
you will go to the the minutes and let's
just start at the top. Um, and we'll
work through the entire two and a half
pages together.
>> We are on July 8th.
So
>> quick note on July 8th at the top of the
pages of two and three which I really is
is the date July 28th. So noted
>> yes got it
>> microphone.
>> Thanks
page what?
>> Uh I'm taking a uh page two bullet point
4 should be past p sed
versus past.
I don't have it numbered. One, two,
three, four. Help me, tell me where it
is.
>> Uh, top of the first scheduling under
scheduling, fourth bullet down.
>> Budget expected.
>> Budget expected to be passed.
>> Yes.
>> Noted
on page one. Uh, I'm suggesting we add
not present
Charles Kelsey, Cynthia Rousus.
And then correct in spelling is Tilly.
Is that correct spelling?
>> That is that is correct.
>> Sure. and correcting the spelling of
Cynthia Rousus
to R USIs.
Uh proposed budget committee meeting
schedule and topics.
Um
is there anything in there that is
needing to be edited or changed or
added?
Um,
so I have a copy of
John Ziggler. your input that came in a
separate mailing
um and I can
reference it if you if you don't have
it.
>> I don't.
>> All right. So,
under proposed budget committee meeting
schedule and topics
under the title new meeting idea focus,
um the the the suggested edit by John is
that we add language that says
um
the committee discussed
compressing the schedule to nine
meetings compared to 14 last year with a
focus on large budget items that extend
across all departments but are outside
the direct control of department heads
eg insurance computers and software and
retirement.
While all members seem to be in favor,
it was decided to table it was decided
to table the discussion to a time when
Sher Kelsey would be present.
Is everybody in agreement with that
language modification?
>> Yep.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. I'll add that. The next line is
new software budget pro formerly
Questica reads allows for horizontal
analysis of costs across fiscal years
complementing traditional department by
department views.
recommended added language from John.
Your note was a random sample was
presented by Karen Epstein who was
encouraged to cons continue researching
the capabilities of budget pro.
And the other recommendation was then to
delete
all of the text following that down
through to the next subject on page two.
Scheduling.
>> Sorry, Charlie. I want
>> I wasn't here for the meeting, so I'm
>> working blind.
>> Question on why we would um delete all
of that. I'm just curious. That was
John's recommendation, but
>> if it was discussed, it should be in the
meeting minutes.
>> Yeah.
>> If you're going to speak, John, use the
mic, please.
>> Microphone, John.
Thank you. The reason for deleting that
and a lot of other things is when I
went online and I looked at meeting
minutes for stuff. Um the what I found
out is that the essential elements
require basic logistics, attendance,
participants, discussion, a brief
objective suffer summary of the subject
matter discussed, not word for word
conversation and decision on votes. What
should be left out are verbatim
transcripts or long conversational
tangents, personal opinions or emotional
remarks made by attendees, detailed back
background reports, these can be
attached or filed separately rather than
written into the text.
>> That is I I that is true, John. I will
say though because a large percentage of
every single committee changes over
every 12 months. I cannot tell you how
frequently we as staff refer back to
meeting minutes. I pulled meeting
minutes from 2018 on a committee that no
longer exists and was we were able to
highlight specific things. So I think we
need to I understand
um what you were saying but I think we
need to find a happy medium here because
we do rely on meeting minutes decades
beyond. Um we were looking at planning
board meetings from the 40s last week.
Um, so we do rely on these pretty
extensively as as a staff.
Okay. So with that, I would suggest what
we do is leave the language as it's
presented here. Um but what earlier we
accepted the addition under the proposed
budget committee meeting schedule and
topics change
and that we
unless there's an objection please that
we move to
page two
and under nonprofit agency funding
application.
Excuse me again.
John, you recommended language directly
uh preeding
purpose with the following statement.
The following proposed edits and
modifications were discussed by the
committee. Period. No decisions were
made, nor was there a vote on this.
Is everybody okay with that? I'll add it
if that is accurate.
>> Okay, I will add that. Uh second, uh an
additional adjustment
um under proposed edits
and modifications
to read
standardized format, excuse me,
and content for outside agencies funding
requests modeled after Lebanon and
Handover applications. ations
that would be inserted under proposed
edits and modifications.
John, that was your recommendation as
well. Is there any
is everybody amendable to that?
>> I like that actually.
>> Okay, we'll add that. Those are the only
edits that John referred and uh I have
to offer.
Any other changes or your edits?
>> Yes.
>> Chris, the microphone for Karen.
>> I'm going to jump ahead to the
page three of three. Is that okay?
>> Sure.
>> And at the very bottom
where it speaks of
historical contest context.
>> Yes.
>> Where it says prior deep dives. Um I
went back to the tape because um in the
lose language was the concept of deep
dives.
>> I think that's an important distinction.
>> How should it read?
>> Should read the concept of deep dives by
the budget committee led to
blah blah blah.
So it would read the concept of deep
dives by the budget committee prior deep
dives by the budget committee led to
acrimony and lack of trust without
significant value. I
>> mean that correct that's what Lou had to
say and that was an was that an opinion
I mean
>> well is that was what was said
>> would that happen? Yeah.
>> Okay.
>> So I think that's an important
distinction.
Okay, everybody okay with that
adjustment?
>> All right.
All right. With those adjustments, um
I'll make those and then we'll post
them. Uh I need uh a vote by the
committee to accept the minutes of July
8th. All
>> as amended.
>> As amended. Sorry. Thank you. All in
favor?
>> I
>> I
>> opposed.
Abstensions.
Motion passes. Thank you.
Uh, pardon me. We'll move on to the
minutes of July 29.
And I'd ask for any a motion first and a
second.
>> Second.
>> Thank you.
Discussion, any changes, any edits, any
modifications?
I got a couple things up at the top. It
says New London Budget Committee. It
says meetings minutes, but other minutes
say meeting minutes.
>> So noted.
>> It says July.
>> Yeah, that was the other thing I had.
>> Okay.
The only other comment I have gets back
to the same comment I made earlier about
the length. This was a meeting that
lasted an hour and 16 minutes. We only
had a quorum for half that time and yet
we've got four pages of minutes.
The public is interested in what's going
on here. They can one they can come for
it and listen to it. They can listen to
the video. They can watch the video.
They can listen to the recording.
I don't know why we have to put on pages
and pages.
>> I send the draft minutes as I get them
and then it is up to the committee to go
through and edit
>> as you see fit.
>> So I am giving the minutes as they are
created.
John is a time thing I guess
>> microphone Chris please.
Is it a is the concern just it's a is it
a time thing for the minutes to go
through because I would think that in in
this situation more is le I mean more is
better to have more information versus
again I think we can see the public's
and I've been on the board for 13 years
you know like we have video now we're
not going to get a lot of people come in
so I think the minutes if people do want
to have an overview of what was
discussed having more there is better
than having less that's all I don't know
what the right amount is. But I'm just
curious.
>> My only concern is that is the things
that are really important get buried in
in this. Um, plus with all of this
writing, there's bound to be something
that maybe might wasn't exactly but
happened and twists somebody the wrong
way and they raise a stink about it. And
um you know, I've been on other boards
that are are chaired by attorneys and
and they harp over and over and over
again, succinct, succinct, succinct. Get
your motions absolutely correct, word
for word, what the vote was,
brief statements about the summary of
other things that were discussed, but
don't just write down every word that
took place. And again, I mean, this is
four pages and this was a particularly
short meeting with only 33 minutes of a
quorum.
>> Um,
so I was not at that particular meeting.
Uh, but I was the corporate secretary
for Lake Suny Bank for several years and
took all of the minutes for every
committee meeting and every board of
directors meeting. And it was to us it
was important that we maintain that we
did document the conversation was had on
particular subjects. Um so you know it
did not have to be verbatim what someone
was stating but I literally hand wrote
like through all of these meetings uh
what was most valuable and then those
became
legal documents. um once they were
approved by the board, but it always
included the conversations. And so I
understand that this is not quite as
imperative as a bank. Um, but I could
just I could see where there is a value
to having, you know, I understand that
it was only an hour, but
you know, four pages doesn't seem that
access just in my previous expert like
experience.
>> No, I'm I'm just giving my opinion and
brief and I promise it's this is the
last time I will bring it up.
>> I think it's I think it's an interesting
topic.
>> Yeah, conver Con conversation is great.
I'm not.
>> Yeah. Well, no, that's a conversation,
but I'm not going to harp on it.
>> I I would like to opine on this just for
a second.
>> Um,
>> so
I believe that governmental minutes are
substantially different from corporation
minutes. And the purpose of governmental
minutes is to provide transparency in
the actions that are made in committees
where corporation minutes are actually
made to simply provide a detailed
outline for shareholders and owners. And
so the liability in in um corporation
minutes is to generally the liability
concern does generally shorten those
minutes down. with that in mind, but
does the exact opposite with
governmental minutes, which is actually
providing more clarity with more voice
because I I I don't think I think we're
talking about apples and oranges here
while we're still talking about minutes
and um I'm out in thin ice. I'm
admittedly like this is not
>> but I like I I do think there's a
difference between governmental minutes
and corporation minutes.
>> I can see both sides. And I think this
was a particularly unique meeting in
which we started without a quorum,
continued to meet and just chat, then
had a quorum for a very short amount of
time and then lost the quorum while it
was recorded because you guys continued
to meet even without a quorum. It was
incredibly important that we did
document what was discussed and that no
or that any voting decisions were made
were made when you did have a quorum. I
just I think we also need to take into
account and yes indeed um the difference
between an advisory committee where a
nar a mere narration of what went on can
be sufficient and a legal committee
estab established by law
such as ours where
you know the the verbatim
um you know the the verb freedom
conversations that have taken place like
Kim says to make a difference and that's
like John said to provide transparency
but it's also to make sure that we have
a documentation because we're we're
dealing with money and that is about the
most important part of of of the um the
town process the town budgetary process
and it certainly is is a resandra
we are here to we're here to deal with
money and the more the more
documentation the more exact we can be
in that the better. So and what Ashley
says is particularly true. It was a it
was a meeting that we didn't have a
quorum for much of it but on the other
hand it was frankly it was about the
most effective it was a very effective
meeting and a lot of a lot went on.
So, I'm I'm happy with the wording.
>> Um, contextually, um,
I'd like to just talk again about our
process because I think that's
important.
We hold a meeting, it is recorded, that
trans recording is transposed into
YouTube. Is that the correct
lineage? which then
is translated out into a document.
So that document then gets a quick
review by Ashley. She sends it to me.
I look at it and I make modifications
that I see that are obvious or if
there's something that I felt strongly
was misrepresented, I would go back to
the tape to verify and make the
adjustment.
The key being that we're not protracting
the editing process of the minutes
to miss the obligation of public access
and posting within five business days.
So my previous experience with it
um had had changed the color of my hair
because it was very challenging. Um
yeah, I used to be gray, now it's sort
of brown. But um Karen,
>> salt and pepper.
>> Salt and pepper. Karen and I did a lot
of back and forth on these minutes and
she was extremely judicious and timely
but there there were it was too
protracted
and frankly timeconuming beyond what's
reasonable.
As a committee, I have been really
intent to minimize the use of town
resources on what I think is nonvalue
added work to their already busy work
schedules. We don't technically Ashley's
the recording secretary, but I removed
her from having to do the minutes and do
all the edits. And I just don't think as
a town administrator that's a good use
of that individual's time.
And as a committee chair, I think
knowing the subject matters and being
diligent, it's a reasonable thing for me
to do. But going forward, having said
that, going forward, I suggest that we
distribute the minutes. I distribute
them upon receipt and my first review
back out to you, but blind carbon copy
you. So, we're not creating a forum, a
quorum.
And if you review it and you have an
editorial comment, you send it back to
me. I'd incorporate it into that and I
ask you to do it within four days of a
meeting. So I have a day in which I can
make the adjustments to make sure we
meet the minimum minimum posting
requirement for the public. Is that
amendable to the committee and is that
amendable to you?
>> Somewhat. I think any any meeting edits
should be discussed in a public forum.
So what should happen is you and I can
work on the draft minutes. You can
certainly send them out to the committee
and say, "Bring your edits to the next
meeting." But those edits,
any edits that you all have should be
discussed at a public meeting. Um,
>> I think what I I hear you and I
understand and agree. I would say that
um we're looking in the first blush to
make sure that it's accurate.
>> Yep.
And there are some nu there may be some
nuances and a nuance may be your
perception individually
that the tenor of a particular subject
is not accurately reflected in the
minutes that should be brought to the
meeting subsequent meeting so that we
can discuss it and adopted as
appropriate. Is that fair from your
>> Yeah, I think is you know I we are being
recorded right now so I have to say that
any edits to the minutes should be done
in a public meeting.
>> All right. So
with that,
we have a a motion to accept
the minutes of July 29th as amended.
Um
what's the pleasure of the committee?
All in favor of adopting them.
>> I
>> I
opposed
abstension
>> I was not I was not present.
>> Okay.
Extensions,
John and Kim.
Okay,
motion passes.
Um,
let's go back to the beginning. Rich, we
were um
started without your presence. So our
hope was if you had any information to
report
uh to the committee that would be of
value to know from the board of
selectmen.
>> I I think the uh the only major things
to to mention that I think you folks
would find of interest
is and feel free to coach me on this. Um
essentially, um we we have voted to
accept a proposal that is in round
numbers approximately $10 million for
the construction of the new Department
of Public Works building and um it was
con it was referred to as the preferred
alternative um of a a variety of
different designs that were submitted to
the board of selectmen. Um, essentially
it's it's just a design that we really
feel will um bring the Department of
Public Works into the 21st century. Um,
it will have things like a wash bay, for
example, for just washing the trucks in
an indoor environment. Um, and enabling
us to do things like wash police
cruisers. Um, and will provide the
ability to do certain maintenance work
on on both DPW um vehicles as well as
police and department and fire
department um vehicles. Um, and so it's
just it's appealing because it just it
will give us a lot more ability to do
things inhouse and frankly just provide
a work environment that I think is going
to be a whole lot more appealing for our
staff. Um, so that's the one thing. Um,
the uh we're sort of still looking at
what the overall construction dates will
be and and what kind of a we're probably
looking at a significant period of time
for the overall construction of this
project. But it's even addressing things
like, for example, a new salt shed
because we've been having a problem with
um salt runoff into Lion Brook and uh
the potential that that causes pollution
problems downstream. And so, you know,
even that you it's sort of a lot we're
trying to take care of a whole lot of
issues sort of in one fell swoop, if you
will. Um, in addition,
um, one of the things, just so you're
aware, that was asked of the design firm
was that they look at the possibility of
putting the police department down
there. And they did come back with some
proposals as to how that could be done,
but it really had a vibe of trying to
shoehorn in the police department into
the the area. Um there is some
additional land that's available, but we
have things like we have the utility, as
you know, right there on the property
and the easements associated with it. In
order to put a police department there,
um it would really be, as I said, for
lack of a better phrase, shoehorning it
in and then allowing very little
available land after that for any
additional expansion of a police
department down the road or any
expansion of the Department of Public
Works down the road. And so we just
didn't like that feeling that we were
kind of stuffing both of them onto a
single property, which originally
sounded very appealing, but in the end
it just didn't seem realistic. Um, so
that's that. In addition, we're also
working on beginning the study having to
do with dispatch. Um, as you folks are
aware, there are many folks who believe
that um that we are somehow losing a ton
of money by having our own dispatch here
in New London. And so we've tasked this
group that we've hired for $30,000
approximately to do a study and to look
at it and to try and give us really what
our options are and and essentially it
comes down to do we keep dispatch or do
we outsource it and so that's sort of in
progress right now. I'm sorry. What was
the actually what was the the timeline
for them to come back for the report?
uh
3 to six months uh was what they had
said. We kicked off the project with
ADCOM about two weeks ago. Now they will
be here on site September 21st and 22nd.
Um they'll be conducting interviews and
sitting in the dispatch center um both
morning, noon, and night um to
understand their operations. They will
be meeting with key stakeholders
individually with each board of
selectmen member. They'll be meeting
with the New London Hospital Ambulance
Service who we do dispatch for. Um and
then for the towns that we
provide dispatching services for, those
will likely be Zoom or phone calls at a
later date. Um New London is the only
town in our region with full-time fire.
Um the fire chiefs in those other towns
are all volunteer. Um so trying to get
them all corral them all in a very short
amount of per short amount of time um to
meet in person didn't seem feasible. So
she will um the consultant will meet
with them individually on the phone over
the next month or so. Um and then we
will be having a public input session on
the night of Monday September 21st
um from 5:30 to 6:30 or 5 to 6. Let me
just check. Um, and this is an
opportunity for members of the public.
Uh,
shoot. Uh, believe it is 5:30 to 6:30.
Um,
look at the calendar here.
One second. And so that's an opportunity
for folks to come and uh share
uh 5:30 to 6:30 here in Whipple on
Monday the 21st um to share their
thoughts to I know there there are folks
within our community that have done a
fair amount of research of their own.
They can share that research. Um, I
imagine that there will be members from
other towns that we provide dispatching
services to that will also attend. Um,
so we'll figure out how to structure
that hour. Um, you know, she will we've
only had one meeting with her and this
will be the first day that she's on
site. So, um, I don't think people can
certainly ask questions, but uh, she's
not going to have much information to
share. This is really an opportunity for
her to hear. um from members of the
public. So
>> yeah, so that that's gonna be
interesting to try and the whole purpose
of this is to try and have an unbiased
report that's just going to give us the
information and examine the
possibilities and then try and make a
recommendation as to, you know, what
makes sense keeping it or getting rid of
it. Um and um any other major things
that I'm missing? Those are the the two
really big things that are sort of, you
know, jumping out at us at the moment.
>> Um, one other thing, if if I may, with
the chair's permission, it is not from
the board of selectmen, but as you know,
I do serve on the NBC for the Ker School
District. And if I could just give you a
quick mention of that because as we
think about burdens on taxpayers, etc.,
and what's coming down the pike. You
know, for them to a large extent, these
things meld together, whether it's the
school district or the town. Um the big
issue that the school district is facing
right now is um simply a a plan to
potentially consolidate to go from four
elementary schools down to two. And the
two that would continue would be New
London and Bradford. and we would be
looking to close Simon school down in
Warner as well as um uh Sutton
Elementary
and um just briefly just for two
different reasons and and you know I
really don't want to bore you folks with
all the the nuances of it all but
essentially
for good reasons I would suggest um in
both cases but different reasons in the
case of Simon school it's more than 160
years old it doesn't owe us anything at
this point and in the 19 years that I've
been on the NBC for the school district.
We've just hurled money at that building
for a long time. And um the the
difficulty is is that and understandably
for the folks of Warner, they love
having a local school that their kids
can walk to and a significant number of
kids do walk to Simons in Warner. Um but
again, because of its age, um the
problem in Sutton is simply one of size.
We have about 70 students currently
going there and to be running a building
with a principal, etc., etc., and all
the the costs that are intrinsic to a
freestanding building. Um it just
doesn't make much sense um from an
efficiency standpoint. Uh again, the
concern on the part of the Sutton folks,
you know, if I might be so bold as to
sum up, again, has to simply do with the
the appeal that they find of having a
small local community school that has a
long history in the town. Um, just so
you're aware, in the case of Sutton, for
example, there's no room for us to
expand it. We can't really add on to it
easily. There's just not space in the
footprint of it. Um, and frankly,
similar for Simons in Warner, just no
easy ability to do that. The important
thing also that you need to know is
essentially we can take all of the
children from those two schools, move
them over to Bradford and New London
pretty much immediately if we want to.
we have enough capacity and we would do
that partly by
having additional capacity by virtue of
we would move fifth graders up to the
middle school. We have very significant
capacity at the middle school level. So
fifth graders would now actually go to
the middle school and that enables us
then to have capacity both at New London
and at Bradford to to take on the kids
from Warner and from Sutton. Um, also as
part of this overall vision, we would be
doing things like, yeah, we would be
building, for example, a gym for the
Bradford School. And the idea would be
to have two elementary schools that were
more modern and that were really, we
were taking it up a notch in terms of
the education that we could offer for
all of the kids, whatever town they're
coming from. The problem is is that, you
know, right now Sutton is so small. You
know, we do things like art on a cart,
for example. There's no art room.
there's no room for it. There's no
gymnasium. The kids use a single small
room for everything. I mean, cafeteria,
auditorium, gym, etc. Um, and in
addition, the the practical realities
are that when we have staff for special
education issues, for example, we have
them splitting their time up amongst the
different schools and they're running
between the different elementary
schools. And just from a travel
standpoint and the logistics of that and
people trying to schedule when they need
to get to a kid who's over in Bradford
and then they also have to deal deal
with a kid who's in Sutton, you know,
just overall by by narrowing it down to
just two elementary schools. Um the
school board voted last week 7 to2 in
favor of this plan. Um
and the NBC is I I we had a meeting last
night for the NBC. Tomorrow night we
have a joint meeting of the school board
and the NBC and I will be looking to at
our next meeting for the NBC we will be
taking a vote to indicate the the the
sense of the municipal budget committee
in terms of this
>> but Rich ultimately it is the vote of
the taxpayers to close the schools not
on the school board or the
>> that's what I was getting at is is that
I was heading towards this is all done
because of some new legislation that was
passed by our friends down in conquered
which um enables 20 members of a school
district to bring forward a written
petition asking for a hearing to be held
to close schools. And so we can have 20
people force a meeting within 60 days
where then um it is discussed and then
voted upon whether or not to close
schools. And we are absolutely that that
has been signed into law at this point.
We're fairly confident that somebody's
going to come up with 20 signatures to
force this issue. Right now, our current
charter for the seven schools that make
up the school district requires that any
vote to close a school would have to be
of the members of that particular town
would have to vote to close the school.
So, I know that Sutton would have to
vote to close Sutton school. Warner
would have to close would have to vote
to close Warner's school. this law will
trump that and quite possibly may bring
forward a lawsuit by somebody's going to
challenge this potentially, but it it
probably trumps our charter. And so now,
in other words, it would be all seven
towns would be voting potentially on
whether or not to close a school.
So, um,
lots of, as you can imagine, lots of
emotion involved with this topic, etc.
Um the purpose of the school boards vote
and I won't speak for the school board
but I will say my sense is that they
wanted to get ahead of the curve when
someone brings forward a petition they
wanted it clear just just to be very
clear with folks they have we've been
studying this sort of officially if you
will for two years I can tell you for 19
years on the NBC we've been kicking this
around off and on and it's always been
up there as a source of conversation
specifically though the school board
created um what was what is referred to
is facilities committee B which was
specifically tasked with looking at the
schools and what their critical needs
are. How much will it cost to repair
them to bring them up to where we need
them to be and whether or not it makes
sense to potentially close some of the
schools and that's where this sort of
that was really the genesis. In fact,
the facilities B committee has spent a
year doing outreach with people,
offering tours of each school
individually to to review what the
issues are with every particular school
where people could come to and offer
their opinions and their thoughts. And
now as the result of that um and the
enrollment realities that we're looking
at, that's why this has all come about.
And uh as I said, you know, it is it's a
very challenging situation because it is
um fraught with emotion for the folks of
Warner and Sutton and understandably so.
You know, for folks who moved into
Sutton and they've got a six-year-old
and a four-year-old and they're quarter
of a mile away from the school and they
had visions of their child walking to
school. Understandable. But um that's
kind of where we're at in not so much of
a nutshell. Rich, where can you comment
on where the um committee is relative to
capital for the what I understood to be
pretty extensive roof repair etc to the
regional school building itself and
numbers were pretty large that were
being
>> yeah I you know the the choice if you
will is spending a large sum of money
north of $7 million to do critical
repairs.
Um or narrow is having a smaller amount
for critical repairs because we aren't
going to be doing that for two of the
buildings. So in other words, you you
knock off Warner and um Sutton and then
instead devote a lot of that money
instead towards bringing Bradford up.
Right now, for example, in New London,
we have a gymnasium.
um Bradford, you know, again is is
dealing with a, you know, what they call
a cafeterium where it's serving multiple
purposes, etc. And the problem is, you
know, especially if we increase the
enrollment at Bradford substantially.
Well, now we have to have more slots for
lunchtime for all the kids to get in
there to have their lunch.
And that means we have less time
available for gym class. And so if we
were to do this, a lot of the kids would
miss out on any significant time in
fizzed each week. And that's why, for
example, part of this plan would be if
we were to close two schools would be to
look to do significant renovations to
Bradford.
So, not to get into the weeds, but um I
would imagine the cost savings would
allow for uh for greater um busing
uh availability. Um,
>> you know, it's interesting actually,
Kim, the the the transportation
situation we don't picture changing
significantly in so far as
some kids would now potentially be
closer to where they're going to school,
some kids would be further away. We
don't see, you know, the the problem is
the reality for our school district. It
is it is geographically the largest in
the state
>> and there's simply never an easy way to
get all the kids to and to do it at a
reasonable cost. It's just um it's it's
always going to be a challenge for us.
Um I will say that for Warner the number
of kids who could walk to Warner school
is significantly larger than the number
of kids that walked to Sutton's school.
Um, you know, we the the superintendent
did a study looking at how many kids
were within walking distance in Sutton
and it's actually surprisingly small.
Um, and so the real issue though is to
to my mind a lot of folks are getting
hung up on looking at the money that
would be spent on this these
renovations. And I keep saying but those
renovations would essentially, for lack
of a better phrase, amount to a band-aid
and the same band-aid routine that we've
been doing for a long time. And instead,
this would be saying, "No, no, no. We're
getting rid of two of the schools, and
instead we're going to significantly
upgrade Bradford as well as doing work
at New London, as well as doing work at
the high school and at uh the middle
school."
>> Okay. I I mean, I I think it's a
fantastic idea. My my thought was just
you know as far as the parents who were
involved that that would be a selling
point if you know you guys were to say
but we are going to increase um the
availability of you know because I know
it's been a challenge in the last few
years because we just don't have a whole
lot of drivers um that we're going to
you know throw a little bit more money
towards you know getting um you know a
little bit a little bit more as far as
that transportation.
>> Yeah. you know, for whatever. It just
seems like that that's just always going
to be a problem and it's just never
going to work cleanly and we're kind of
but the the good thing about and and
what I said at the select at the
schoolboard meeting last week the I
didn't want to get into all the details
and I certainly didn't get into this
much detail.
>> Yeah. No, no, no.
But I did say last week I said if in my
role I said if I for a moment did not
believe that this would provide a better
education for all of our kids including
Sutton including Warner I wouldn't be
supporting it. I am convinced that it
will do a great deal to give all of the
kids especially Sutton and Warner a
better education because they will be
going to a better facility and yes now
they may be getting on a bus but you
know we had one gentleman who lives in
Newbury stand up and he spoke quite
eloquently I think he where he said you
know we don't have a school in Newbury
and he said we have tremendous community
spirit even though we don't have a
school and we're quite happy with the
school we have where our kids go meaning
the cure school district and physically
those buildings are not in the town of
Newbury. He goes, "That's okay." He
goes, "We've got a great school
district. It's a terrific environment."
And keep in mind, for example, Sutton
does have the middle school and the high
school, whereas Wilmet, Springfield,
Newbury don't have any schools at all.
So,
>> uh, Richard, I wonder if the board has
tried to build up the conscious of the
community to the fact that we're in the
midst of a demographic cliff. And um I
didn't I'm you know I serve as adviser
in in my alma mater which is also in in
raw financial shape because of that
demographic cliff and it's not going to
be any getting any better till uh
nationwide till 2040.
Um and in New England it's going to be
even worse. We're looking at a 20 to 25%
decrease in the eligible school age
population. It's Yeah. It's not gonna
get It's not gonna get better.
>> Can we Sorry. I don't I don't want to
We're gonna keep getting into the weeds
here. It's okay. It's okay. There's a
There's a meeting tomorrow night that
everybody
>> I apologize for that. I just No, I think
it was a good
information
>> in the conference room. They'll be
meeting in the conference room. Sure. I
guess to what I heard, if this is
accurate, there is still a significant
capital investment required to
accommodate the plan that you have just
articulated if adopted and that number
that I had heard was somewhere in the 20
to $30 million. I I think overall when
you talk about the new construction and
the critical needs we would be probably
and this is again just a round number
that we're just kicking around
>> looking understand magnitude
>> we're looking at probably a $30 million
bond
>> so
>> and that bond would be let next year or
the
>> it would
>> it would go on the warrant
>> it would probably we would probably be
hoping to bring that forward potentially
at this this um meeting coming up in the
spring.
>> Okay.
All right. Any if not uh any other
salient questions, we're going to move
on. Okay. Um subject I'd like to discuss
now is the in front of you you have a
draft copy of what's titled the request
from initial appropriations from outside
organizations
and towns, town commissions, committees,
and boards. Just to step back a bit,
this committee agreed that this was
something we should pursue. um would be
helpful for both the organizations that
were um asking for appropriation and be
helpful to the committee in its
deliberations and we were hopeful that
it would be also that for the uh board
of selectmen. Um I was absent and unable
to make the presentation to the board of
selectmen. Chris Laurio stepped in on my
behalf and our behalf as a committee and
presented what is in front of you, which
is a draft um uh document. Um I I'd
leave it to Chris and and Rich to just
reflect the tenor of that um uh the
receipt of that by the board of
selectmen. Um I understood from the um
uh download of the meeting that it was
not supported by the board of selectmen
and there were reasons for them uh not
doing so. Um and the hope and intent was
that if the two organizations, the
budget committee and board of selectmen
were in agreement, we would go forward
with this to the outside agencies uh
organizations uh asking for
appropriations this fiscal year. since
it was not adopted by the or supported
by the board of selectmen. Uh that puts
us in a time crunch and would be
unrealistic to present to an outside
organization
to allow them timely uh submission of
their requests which will be due along
with all the budgets from department
heads um in uh October. So, with that
said, maybe Chris or Rich, you could
represent why the board of selectmen
elected not to support it.
>> Sure. Um,
>> microphone needs to be on.
>> Y,
>> absolutely.
Uh, there were a couple of, uh, pieces
of feedback from the select board. Um, I
think they were, you know, happy that we
were taking a look at the the the way
the feedback is provided. Uh I think
some of the questions and concerns were
that some of the questions to the select
men seemed unnecessary. Um maybe even
and don't take this maybe the wording is
not appropriate but inappropriate. There
was some discussion around digging a
little too far into other other
organizationals other organizations
internal affairs um process risk being a
little bit overly detailed and creating
extra work for both the applicants and
the town staff. Uh there was thoughts
around some of the questions being
redundant or asking for the same
information in different ways. Um and
the board overall wanted more emphasis
on justifying the requested amount
rather than collecting general
organizational background that the town
already has. Um also two process points
were brought up uh for the record.
Organizations present to the selectmen
for approvals of amounts which then go
to the budget committee. Uh no
organization is legally required to fill
out any form. So it functions as a tool
to help the town understand requests
rather than a mandate. Um, so I think I
think but also you've already sent out
uh according to the selectman minutes,
you've already sent out the letter for
this coming bud.
>> I did uh the the following week I sent
out the email to all organizations and
then the um town committees that receive
an appropriation with their request.
What I did ask them for is um an
explanation of whether that amount
increased or decreased and why um if
they serve uh other communities other
than New London.
Are they asking them for appropriations
as well? Um you know, I think we've
talked about this a bit. We are
certainly feeling the pressure of um and
this isn't just regarding money. It is
really across the board of New London uh
carrying a lot of the weight for other
communities and it sort of hides itself
in different pockets here and there but
it is something that certainly the board
of selectmen and um the department heads
and I discuss quite frequently um when
we think about what I'll call mutual aid
which comes in many different forms and
what that looks like is that there's um
I think there's always been a view of
New London will take care of it. Um but
as frankly as conquered continues to
push things down on municipalities
um we need to be more responsible here
and and um provide mutual aid in
whatever form that is um when
appropriate, but it can't be a given. Um
and I think that there are communities
and and organizations that have just
sort of said New London's got it. Um, so
being a little bit more thoughtful and
having organizations be a bit more
thoughtful about that as well.
>> You want to add anything, Rich?
>> No.
>> Okay. Um, thank you and Chris, thank you
for um, representing it. Um it was the
sentiment of this committee that this
was a good idea uh both now and for the
future as appropriation requests begin
to change and
um and will um but it was not adopted
and our timeline is too tight to um this
committee does have the authority to
issue this to an outside organization
but given the timeline
Uh my personal opinion is I think it
would be premature for us to do that at
this time. I do think my opinion and ask
for yours that when these organizations
present to the budget committee there
are some questions in here that may be
you may want to ask and you have every
right to ask them. Um but we have not
given this to those outside
organizations. So they may not in that
moment be prepared to be able to answer
that question but we have certainly the
right and the obligation uh to ask in a
very thorough and complete way without
being overburdensome.
So I I'm my recommendation to us as a
committee is that we use it as a basis
to support those discussions when they
take place um in our budget review uh
schedule.
Um,
I guess the only I I have a question,
Rich, for you. Um, which is not to call
you out, but I I I
think I heard on the tape that you were
not in favor of it, um, being utilized
and your reasoning and then supported by
the other two select board members.
Why why if you were in opposition didn't
you bring that to our attention during
our deliberations?
And and I'm asking because there was a
lot of time spent to put this together
by a couple of people in in in
particular and it was very thoughtfully
done. two- town handover and Lebanon
were used as representative models that
we then modified based on sort of the
same feeling that was too much, too
formal, too not not necessary. And then
there was a a sentiment to try to make
sure uh we segregated out what a
commissioner committee or board was
asked versus an outside organization
understanding the nuances and
differences uh of those entities. So I
just why help me understand why
why you didn't bring your objections
forward earlier that might have
influenced this committee
>> you know
>> in the work.
>> Yeah. You know Candidly, first of all, I
don't always remember all the details of
some of these meetings. Sometimes it
gets a little blurry. Um, I will say
this, um, sometimes it's also a matter
of, um, sometimes after reviewing
something and reflecting upon it for a
while, I sort of, you know, over time my
viewpoints, uh, sort of
solidify and become more formalized. Um,
I also I guess one of the key things is
is that I, you know, I try to be mindful
of the fact that I'm not the same as you
folks here. You folks were elected to
the NBC here and you patiently allow me
to, you know, attend these things, but,
you know, I wasn't elected to the NBC
for the town. And so I also, you know, I
I I want to try and be mindful of the
fact that it's not my place to hold
forth too much, if you will, in these
meetings.
And uh you know as I said beyond I I
will say that that the one issue that I
did have with it that does stand out was
just when I feel like it just becomes a
bit burdensome at times in terms of the
amount of information we expect people
to give us especially when
for example if we're talking about lake
coasts I think we all know what the lake
coasts do and what their role is you
know and to ask for them to provide
enormous data etc to show what they do
and to explain you know, it just
sometimes, you know, to my mind, you
know, we we all know what the lake hosts
do. I think you know um
but you know as I said you know beyond
that Charlie I really I can't tell you
that I have a clear recollection of when
>> I would just my personal um request is
if you you your opinion matters just as
every member of this committee's opinion
matters and and voicing it is is helpful
to our process because I think there are
it helps inform form decisions and
direction and process and certainly uh
the dual role you you you play um is is
helpful to us can be helpful to us and I
I certainly do view it that way. Um, I
just I was sort of I looked at this as
something that would be worthwhile not
just this year but subsequent years
because the world's going to change on
us and keep changing and it's going to
get more complex and putting some
structure to something of this nature to
me makes good sense.
um brevity, form, delivery, timing,
preparation required, that's all in the
minutia of how it happens. But I do
think there's some value there. And um
uh I think this committee wants and is
working in a collaborative fashion with
all parties, including the board of
selectmen. um and the delay in going
forward with it put us into a crunch
where we couldn't use it if this
committee deemed it as something that
would be valuable in this budget year.
So I just leave it there and just say I
think it's a really important your voice
is heard, your objections are heard and
your support as well and going forward
uh I hope that be the spirit we continue
in.
>> Yeah. and and so you certainly you know
sort of noted um your thoughts on that
and I will keep that in mind. Um I I
will say this just you for the record I
think the overall idea is a good one. I
do think to have a more formal
sort of you document on file with with
the town is is a useful thing. Um just
you know again you know I I would lean
towards more brevity. Um, but the
overall concept of a of a form a
formalized method for people to apply
and ask for financial assistance from
the town, I think that does make sense.
And so,
>> yeah.
>> Yeah. I was just going to say my my
recommendation is when the budget season
is over next spring is that this is
something that you guys could work
through in partnership with the board of
selectmen leading up to the next fiscal
year, the next budget cycle that we
start next fall. Um but allowing a good
amount of time for both parties to work
through together um what it looks like.
>> Yeah. So, my apologies, Charlie, if you
felt that I wasn't, you know,
>> no apology necessary. I just wanted to
understand your thinking and and uh and
hear it firsthand. Um, any other
questions on this subject by any other
member? K.
The only thing I would like to add is in
terms of when the organizations would
come before us, I'd hate to have them be
caught off guard if there were some
questions that um you know, I'm h I'm
thinking back to last year's um
presentations and it was a a wide range
of um content that was put forward, some
very brief, some much more detailed and
um so just trying to think think out
loud here. Are there is there is there a
way that um we could kind of give a
heads up to some of these organizations
who may not be used to providing
information if we were to use you know
bring forward a question from here that
they weren't prepared for that could be
an awkward um awkward thing for them is
um there another way in which we could
post this or let them know please be
prepared some you know their choice or
not if they'd like to just get a heads
up on questions that may come their way.
That's just my thought.
>> I I'm not I don't know. I don't think
any of us want to be putting an
organization
um into a uncomfortable position. Um but
I I don't think we would for example in
a discussion with an outside
organization say to them uh could you
provide me your 990 please before we um
you know in the next three days or
something of that nature. I think the
questions that I'd leave it to each
individual to use their judgment at this
time. I like Ashley's recommendation of
table it till next year. We'll refine it
and get some of all of the input of the
select board as well as all members
um to condense and refine it. Um but I
think that
we should be diligent about asking
what's a legitimate question and one of
them is I I agree with your analogy on
LOS. We all know what Lakos do. we know
what the value of that is. So that may
not be something in that presentation by
the lake hosts uh or the protective
associations we would be asking
necessarily. I think naturally they
provide that information. However, there
may be an entity, I don't want to name
one right now, but that we really don't
understand. For example, how do they
determine the amount they ask New London
for versus another town that they
support? And I think that's a very
legitimate question to ask and I don't
think that's an I gota. I think they
should be prepared and able to present
that kind of information.
>> Thank you. That was kind of where my
thought was going was, you know, not to
get in the detail of a 990 per se, but
these other broader questions back to
the point that we hear um in terms of
these organizations that support are
involved in servicing multiple towns. Is
New London bearing a proportional amount
of their cost?
>> Agreed.
>> Along those lines. Thank you.
>> Yeah. Thank you. Any other comments?
Okay, let's move on. Um, Lynn, do you
want to just just address quickly um FY
2026 financials and Sure.
>> where we're at, where where we're going,
and by when. Maybe.
>> Um, the auditors are diligently working
to to um finalize everything. There was
an unexpected delay. Um, they I think
they've got that resolved. Um, so
something should come down, you know,
fairly quickly. they'll in the next
couple weeks they'll give me the um the
journal entries to make the changes and
but at this point they could not even
ballpark me. Um and I don't want to
ballpark you know where we landed or you
know what what our um how much of the
operating budget we used and and what
can go to unassigned funds. They were
not they were not close to that yet
because of a missing piece. Um and it's
it's not I'm not going to fingerpoint or
anything. It's not anybody's real fault
other than we have some newbies. Um so
that that got resolved today and that'll
um soon as I have it I will be putting
that out.
>> Okay.
Thank you. Um let's move to our
committee meeting schedule before you.
You have a draft uh dated September 9th.
Um, I took the liberty of going back to
our previous discussions about schedule,
how we were thinking about topics, uh,
timing, other key events. I took
Ashley's memorandum to us reflecting the
key dates really starting in January on
through to
um the, uh, submission of the
information for the production of the
town report. And I've included those key
dates and activities in this schedule so
we have context. And I do not mean to
represent this in any way to you as
perfect. I did this today just hoping we
could um at least see if this seems to
make good sense. I tried also to reflect
the spirit of our previous meeting in
which we talked about how much of the
apple do we want to bite off in a given
meeting to ensure substantive
conversation and deliberation
um and do it as expeditiously as well.
So I that I've put the proposed draft
schedule here before you together with
that in mind. Um, and if I can just try
to walk down through the document with
you and also Ashley make sure I got it
right in relation to some of these other
dates. But on September 23rd, um, I'm
proposing a meeting of the budget
committee. Does everybody have a copy? I
put one in front of all of you. Do you
have one, Lou?
You have an extra one right here.
Okay. I'm proposing a next meeting of
this committee on the 23rd of September
to review the governance and operations
guide. We'll hear from Karen later on
that. Um and if timing is right, Lynn,
that we could review 2026.
>> Fingers crossed.
>> Fingers crossed. The only thing that I
will say is I will not be able to
attend. That is the week that the
company that we have um engaged for the
dispatch study will be on site.
>> Um and so I it is unlikely that I would
be available that night.
>> Okay.
So probably not a good meeting date.
We'd need to do another date if that
were and not before then.
I don't think but
you could tell me what flexibility you
might or might not have.
>> Looking at the calendar that's just two
weeks out from now. So I don't know how
much more of an update I will have. So
if you wanted to push it out a week or
or two maybe
>> why don't we say two weeks and then we
can look into October somewhere in
there.
>> Um let me move forward on that. So we
have a jump ball there. October 2nd is
the target date for department heads to
submit their budgets. Is that correct?
>> That is correct. Friday, uh October 2nd
for all department heads and outside
organizations, committees, commissions,
and boards that receive an
appropriation. And then that following
week, October 5th, we will be heads down
preparing the budget binders for both
the board of selectman and the budget
committee.
Um
21st of October was capital improvement
um program public hearing. Uh John Tilly
and I attended the session with the
planning board uh on the CIP uh last
week and had a really great meeting. So
the document uh itself
uh will be finalized and presented for
public review by then and will include a
narrative supporting it. So that
information will be available to this
committee and certainly feel free to
come to the public hearing if you wish.
The October 23rd is the board of
selectman's uh dayong uh budget reviews.
Um and all members of this committee are
invited encouraged if you can. It's very
helpful. It is a dayong meeting. Um so
from here out I have lumped what I saw
as reasonable topics and volume of
topics suggesting November 4th we do
capital improvement capital reserves
police and dispatch and town audit
report if it's available for just
overview if there are any major issues
or notes would we have the audit by that
time?
>> November
when's the audit done? January.
>> Okay. So, that's not going to happen
then. All right.
My error. November 18th, I'm suggesting
public works and fire.
December 2nd, administration, tax
collector, town clerk, planning,
finance, emergency management, Tracy,
library, and rec recreation.
That's a that's a a big apple on that
day. But
>> could I just ask maybe Ashley a little?
Are there any
anything this this budget season that we
think any topics that you think will be
from departments that will be more
talked about than others? Any like
>> No, I think the DPW facility, the
building, the bond for 10 million. Um
that's certainly the biggest ticket item
that we've got. Um
but I can't think of anything as of
right now. they're they're all still in
the process of putting together their
budgets. So, there's nothing that comes
out in my mind. Um the folks that have
um mentioned things to me as they are
working through it have said it's it's
relatively flat. Um but I'll certainly
know by October okay second.
>> And the only reason I asked that is just
because that date of the 18th with
public works and fire. I just know that
those that police just tend to get more
discussion.
>> So
either be prepared for a longer meeting
or
>> Yep. And I will say just as I feel like
I say this every time we meet, this room
is booked starting at 8:15 every
Wednesday night by New London Police for
a training series that they have. So, we
do need to
be somewhat succinct here and try to get
out by 8.
I mean, again, my only suggestion would
be to either
>> maybe keep public works on that date
>> since that seems to be where there's
going to be a lot of discussion
>> and you can either put in like the
outside organizations or maybe put in
some of the December 2nd
>> departments so that we're not faced with
like running over by talking about fire.
Um, unless we don't think that fire
department's going to have any
big budget requests.
>> I think that they all signs point to
them requesting their fourth full time.
>> Yeah. Which will I just think Yeah,
that's all. Yep.
>> Those two just seem to be like the two
bigger ones on one date and if we want
to focus on one area. I don't know. Just
a thought.
>> Well, I I I
hear you. Um
I think what we were trying to
accomplish was getting police dispatch,
Department of Public Works, and fire.
Those being the big three.
>> Um,
sort of
combine I I we could go for
>> I mean, we can try to do this, but I I
guess what I don't want to do is I don't
want to short shift a discussion just to
get through it. Um but at the same time
um you know things that I think are are
are probably easy to talk about
administration, tax collector, town
clerk, planning and finance
are easy because they're not big
>> and pretty they're pretty
straightforward. Those go pretty quickly
and there's nothing that no surprises or
big things coming obviously. Uh Lou, I
don't know about emergency management.
you made comments that you thought we
should spend a little more time on it um
with some of your feedback.
>> When I'm looking at the the
you know the breath and the time
>> microphone
>> Thank you.
>> You're welcome.
>> Yeah. when I'm looking at the at the
breadth and the timeline that we have.
Um I mean I doesn't doesn't necessarily
have to be you know we're going to make
we're going to make you know some cuts
in emergency management just to to
ensure that we can we can maintain while
while being a little bit more efficient.
But but um yeah it's I I don't need a
particularly long time for emergency
management.
>> Okay. So, that's going to go that those
four five areas go fairly quickly. That
leaves Tracy Library and Recreation.
>> Why don't we just leave it the way it
is? And I was just talking out loud.
>> No, I I'm I'm with you. I I'm I'm
interested in fire because it's a new
chief um new ideas and and possible new
direction. Even though we know there' be
a continuing request for another FTE,
>> I don't think recreation's going to be
anything. I mean, obviously I haven't
been I wasn't at the most recent
meeting, but I don't think it's going to
be anything crazy.
>> No, it'll just be 15 minutes on how we
pay for
>> one one question, please. I just when it
comes to the fire department, I want to
make sure you know, are we're going to
be al having the board of fireworks
here, too?
>> Yes. Typically, typically Steve Ensign
joins with the chief
>> because you know you do have a chief but
the overarching strategy for a fire
department is not
>> the operation the operational guy the
chief. It's the board of fireworks. So,
uh they're the ones who designed the
strategy for the fire department.
>> Agreed.
>> And this fourth position is the fourth
and and final as the in this plan that
they developed several years ago. Um,
>> and that has not changed. That is that
has not changed
>> going forward.
>> Correct.
>> To be clear though, we would wind up
with six full-time
staff for the fire department.
>> Four, five,
>> chief,
the four shift commands,
>> and this would be the sixth.
>> No, we currently have three shift
officers.
the we didn't backfill when we promoted
Mike to um
chief. We did not backfill his position.
So we've got Mike, Andrew, Steve Dubbie,
Brandon,
>> and and I'm sorry. So who was the who's
the new employee then filling the the
slot that was voted in at the last town
meeting?
>> Andrew Cernovitz,
>> right? So, I thought that brought us up
to five total slots, and I thought in
the proposed budget that would be a
sixth.
>> Well, we can go back to them, but they
currently have five. When I talked to
Mike earlier today, I asked if they were
hire recruiting, and he said no, they
are not. They would be looking for the
next position at the next town meeting.
>> And that would be the sixth, correct?
>> That would be five. That would be five.
>> Okay. three shift officers and
>> that's not my recollection but
>> okay I'll yeah I'll I'll clarify with
him but as of this morning he said they
are actively not they would be looking
for the additional headcount
at the next town meeting
>> okay um I think everybody can read
December 9th and December 16th of what
the topics are that are suggested this
is leading up to January 13th being the
meeting where we review and adopt our
budget
which is earlier than we have done in
the past.
>> Yeah. And just sorry one as I'm looking
at this line I'm says patriotic purposes
we don't typically talk much about.
However, we likely will this year. Uh
New London is celebrating our 200th or
250th 250th in 2029. So, we are looking
to form a committee uh in the next year
or so and we will likely be looking for
uh some budgetary um line items here
starting in the FY28 budget. So, no idea
what that looks like just yet, but that
will be more than the $500 that's in
there.
>> Say $600 and
>> Yeah, I I think it's going to be a
little bit more.
Um but I I do think we will see that
increase.
um certainly more than what it has been
in the past.
>> So if if if we are successful in
adopting a a budget on the 13th or if we
are not I left the 20th as a wiggle room
week. If we can't accomplish it by the
13th, we'd accomplish it by the 20th
and then our public hearing be scheduled
for February 3rd.
for the proposed budget
and then subsequently the um submission
uh to the of the budget to the board of
selectmen and that's just a formal
submission. It's not a meeting.
>> Charlie, what
what if there's reconciliation that
needs to happen?
>> Uh that would have to happen on the
20th.
>> Okay.
and that that I didn't put
reconciliation in there. Um I received
uh feedback at the polls
yesterday. Was it yesterday? Um
something to the effect by a person who
will remain anonymous
have you finally got that budget
committee under control so we're not
going to have a re uh uh a debate about
whose budget we're going to accept or
not? and I said, "I do not have the
committee under control." So, I left it
at that. So, I I didn't put it in here
with that in mind that we would have
that, but in the event the two budgets
didn't match and we needed to reconcile,
I thought that could be done on the
20th.
>> Great.
>> I would only ask that if we vote on the
13th, there may be a chance that I'm out
of town. um that if that I could make
the meeting but it would have to be
virtual. Um so as long I would want to
know that before I gave my opinion
>> and I have the same situation. I am
going to be out of town
>> on the third January
>> for January just to be clear January.
>> Yeah. I mean, if there's one meeting,
not that I'm not going to plan to attend
all of them, but if there's one meeting
to be at, it's the one where we vote. I
just want to make sure if I'm not here
in person, I'll still be able to do that
virtually.
>> Same here. I
>> We do not have a policy yet. The board
of selectmen need to make that decision.
But it is very important to keep in mind
that even if we do allow remote
participation, there still needs to be a
quorum in the room.
>> Yeah.
Can you make the 20th?
>> I can make the 20th. I mean, yes. As far
as I know, I can make the 20th. The 15th
is
>> Can you make the 20th?
>> 13th is in question.
>> Can you make the 20th of January?
>> I will be gone from the 10th to the
24th.
>> Uh, okay.
>> January
and most of it is going to be out out of
the country.
>> Okay.
>> Could we do it before the 13th?
>> Does it have to be on a Wednesday?
>> It I just picked Wednesdays because it's
our traditional meeting. Uh, we could
meet on the 6th if people were
available.
>> What day?
>> It's a Wednesday.
>> Sorry. Of what month?
>> January.
>> Thank you.
>> January 6th.
>> For all of these days, there's a
personal My daughter's pregnant and when
my daughter's baby is born, I might be
gone. And so,
six sounds good. I think I can be here.
It's a little bit early, but it's also
getting a little tight. So, but so is
the 13th. So,
yeah,
>> just that.
>> Assuming gravity doesn't mess with me
anymore, I'll be here.
>> It would be nice to hear a baby crying
from the background, wouldn't it?
>> Understanding life events will get in
the way.
>> Um, and respected accordingly. Um, we
will on this schedule change the meeting
on the 13th to January 6th.
>> I'll be hearing January 6th.
>> Okay.
>> Now, you're still going to have the
meeting on January 8th?
>> No, we have no meeting January 8th.
That's a public hearing public hearing
that we require. That's just a important
date of an event
and that would leave us still wiggle
room certainly if
>> uh there is a need for reconciliation
and
timely budget uh public hearing and that
would bring all of the necessary
information
to Ashley and the team relative to
warrant annual report timing
Yes. So it is it safe for me to share
these dates with my department heads
>> for when they will be up?
>> Let me let me do this. Let me edit this
document and I will send it to the
committee and to you.
>> Great.
>> With uh these this is a plan.
>> All right. Everybody okay with it?
>> All right. we will move forward.
>> And then voting is March 10th. That's
when we'll be at the polls. And then
town meeting is likely to be that
following Wednesday, which is I believe
the 17th.
>> March 17th.
>> March 10th is the uh
>> voting here in Whipple. So that's the
day that
>> March 10th.
>> March 9th.
>> Tuesday. March 9th.
>> Okay. is the day that we vote across the
state. And then New London will
continue. Town meeting, it opens that
Tuesday morning. Um the business portion
of the meeting, which is town meeting,
will take place likely that Wednesday
after. I've got to get with Colobby
Sawyer to figure out their um
>> schedule.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Vacation schedule.
>> So much better.
>> It's really fantastic. We were able to
get folks in with mobility issues
significantly easier. So it
>> So that would be on the hon or around
the 16th
>> 17th
>> 17th.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Okay. Maybe.
>> Okay.
>> Oh my god.
>> All right.
>> Uh governance document update. Karen,
the floor is yours.
>> We have some good news. Um, we have a
draft ready and touched on this briefly
when we last met and so here's the plan.
So rather than having to make all these
waste all this paper, all these copies,
we'll send I will send to members of the
committee
bccing a copy of the document
and it's all it's all labeled as draft
for you to review it.
Um, first I want to thank
Charlie for his reiterations and his
going through um what we had um as a
product of last time we met John as well
John Ziggler and Cynthia Rousus for
their participation in pulling this all
together.
So
then I think we can then address this
at our next meeting as a committee after
you've all had the chance to go through
and react to it. The template that was
used to set the framework was what was
presented way back in June June 3rd I
think is when we met and we we came to
an agreement with regard to using that
framework. So, we've tried to stay with
the framework and pulling in other um
resources being chapter 32 91A
um other example that other towns have
for their bylaws what they call it their
governance document.
So that would be would be the the plan I
think any and Charlie I don't know
whether you have any any additional
thoughts on that but um definitely want
to get your feedback on what it is that
we have at this point.
So if the document's distributed,
you read it, review it, we come to a
meeting with your comments, your edits,
your suggestions. That meeting
we will to be determined. I had proposed
September 23rd, but if
our fiscal 2026 actual numbers aren't
going to be ready, maybe we look at a
October
meeting date to do the governance
document and the budget review for
actuals for 2026.
Secondly, so we're going to need to look
at calendars again. Um, I'll come back
to that. Um, Karen and I discussed um
the possibility of having
um somebody from the New Hampshire
Municipal Association review the
document. um putting their eyes to it to
see if we're accurate in all the
references to the various terminology
um RSAs, municipal budget law, um
references to protocol procedures just
to be sure we've dotted the eyes and
crossed the tees. We don't know. I I I
think that's a good idea. Um, and if the
committee supports it, then we would
approach the municipal association and
see if they're willing to do that. And
if if there's a cost associated with it,
then we could consider that if in fact
there is. But I think it's a pretty easy
document to review. Um, and they've been
incredibly receptive to requests. I I've
made just queries on questions of
various subjects and very responsive and
very thorough. So, I'd like to suggest
we do that as well if there's an
agreement. Um, so if that makes sense to
everyone, is there a date in October we
could meet to cover the governance and
operations guide, get everyone's input
so it can be finalized and adopted,
and we'd be uh able to hopefully review
our fiscal 2026 financial results.
Um,
yeah, I'm in the wrong year, so that's
why I'm pausing.
What would you feel about the
possibility of a meeting on the 14th or
the 20 the 14th?
>> 14.
>> Yeah,
>> I won't be here, but
>> I would I would like the 14th.
>> 14th. You would would
>> I would I would
>> would Kim's not we may not have 100%
attendance. So
>> yeah, I was gonna say I mean we're not
not gonna
>> Chris 14 okay with you for right now.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah. I'm like if you get the majority
so far
>> 14th. Yes. I I'll update this Lou and
send it out to you.
>> Okay.
>> And so you have all the dates. All
right. So we're changing the to the next
meeting of this committee October 14
that's a Wednesday
topics governance and operations guide
feedback
edits uh adoption if uh if if possible
and also review the FY 2026
actual the budget
>> if we do have more than a couple folks
that can't make it. Should we think
about pushing the adoption to
>> Yes.
>> meeting?
>> Yes.
>> That's all.
>> Yes. Agree. Adoption may be a little
aggressive, but I kind of like to get
things done. So, agree. If we'll get
through the edits and input and then the
adjustments made and then we can have a
final document for adoption.
And understanding that what we agreed to
was also this is going to be a living
document meaning it'll reside online.
It'll be available to all members. It'll
be available to the public with the
intention that we would then have the
responsibility to update and modify it
as laws change, procedures change,
protocols change so we keep it current.
>> Those changes will those changes have to
be voted on?
>> I don't know.
>> I'm not sure.
>> Say that. Sorry. Say that again. changes
need to be voted
>> because it's a live document and that
we'd be making changes to it to keep it
current, but would they have to be voted
on
>> of the governance document?
>> Yeah,
>> it hasn't been approved yet.
>> Yeah, it hasn't even been approved, but
any changes would need to go back
through some sort of review. Um,
>> yes, but I think that this is a question
for this committee with us editing a non
approved the document. So, I don't think
there's any reason for us to vote on
changes that we would make to the
document. We would
>> I think John was
>> No, I'm just asking I'm just asking the
question. It's at some point we're going
to vote to either accept this document
or reject
>> adopt it. Yep. You just adopted it.
>> But then going forward, it's supposed to
be a live document and there'll be
changes. My question is, were we going
to have to vote every time or can we put
something in there that states that from
time to time the budget committee will
make changes? Those changes can be
spelled out in the minutes or someplace
else, but it would not have to be
specifically voted on
as part of the whole document. again.
>> Um
>> I don't
>> I Yeah, I don't I I guess it because
then I would say, well, that really just
depends on what changed.
>> It could be something very important or
very minor.
>> And that's that's someone's opinion.
>> Yeah. And I I would say any sort of
change regardless of whether it's small
or not needs to then go through another
review outside of this committee just to
ensure that everything is copacetic
>> because in two years you could have a
>> sure
>> new friend budget.
>> Yeah. So I and I would think that most
if of those adjustments and changes
would come from the New Hampshire
municipal
um assoc uh association
um unless we as a committee made some
substantial adjustment to a procedural
issue.
>> One other question that you were talking
about the review of this document which
was on this sheet for September 23rd and
you talked about moving it to a date.
Are you talking about moving everything
that's on the 23rd to some other date
which
>> October 14th?
>> October 14th and take out the 23rd
altogether.
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
>> Okay. Good to move forward. Thank you
Karen for spearheading it.
Um public input.
Do we have some?
>> Poor guys.
>> Larry's been here. Larry, we need to
give you a microphone. Karen, could you
extend that to Larry, please?
>> You're welcome.
>> And Larry, just announce yourself. Yes,
>> please.
>> Oh, there. Yeah, Larry Cloth, New
London. Um, first of all, you can see by
today listening live how complicated a
business running a town is, right? I
mean, you like to think it's going to be
simple and easy, but it there are all
kinds of things that change. And
Richard, one of the things you talked
about was HP, I think 7 HP1374,
that any town in a district in in New
Hampshire with 20 people can give a
60-day notice to pull out of a region.
And that's a big deal for your budget.
And if I listen carefully, I wasn't at
the seventh September 4th meeting, but
listening, one of the towns talked about
it.
>> So get that with your $10 million I
think borrowing you were talking about,
which is what 2 million a year in
interest, something like that in
principle and interest. I just thought
you all should know. I mean, it's about
money, but everybody's got what they
want and you got all kinds of things we
want to do. But I just give you a heads
up as you're going into that. If the T
I'm sorry, not for your 10 million, for
the 30 million. Sorry, I apologize. 30
million the school's talking about, how
much do we have to pay,
right? And we already pay the school
12.5 million. And we had two years ago
roughly 243 New London students at
Currage. And that's $50,000 a student.
>> It's just, you know, so I just thought
I'd bring that up and I if this is the
wrong place to bring it up, I apologize.
I know there's
>> perfectly fine to bring it up here and
part of that conversation was um
enemating if not directly saying that
there's significant capital investment
that has to be made regardless of the
plan and it will be reflected in our tax
rate and we also have significant debt
that potentially we will incur in a
similar very short time frame. And I
think that will become very clear when
the uh committee sees the uh capital
improvement program um that we've got
some pretty hefty years coming upon us
and in conjunction I think Larry you're
making the point that the school is also
sort of in line at the same time and so
the impact is going to be um significant
>> and I should say but you have no control
over the school
>> right we have No, no, no control
whatsoever over it.
Thank you, Larry, very much. Thank you
for your patience in listening to this.
Well, um
>> I I am going to
>> No, I said before
>> go to other business.
>> Okay.
>> Okay. So, is there other business for
the committee to review or discuss?
Karen,
>> not so much to discuss right now, but uh
as we were reviewing the minutes early
on that uh what was the date? July 8th
minutes. And um as you can recall, there
was a schedule distributed at that
meeting that showed a trend in budget
appropriations for selected accounts.
And I remember Kim's rightly so asked a
very good question in terms of context
and terms of context of those numbers
and what we had was just budget. So what
I've done is to try and fl to flush that
out a bit more and provide context for
it. So this is a a schedule here just
for distribution um discussion at some
other time but it's just to really
respond to that context question. and
went back a little further, went back to
2021
and we have on those counts that were
presented at the time, we have budget
and actual and it goes forward from 2021
to budget for 2027. And again, this is
using the um budget pro system to create
this. As we know, there are some hiccups
that are still being worked out, as is
true with any new system. But just to
kind of keep that ball rolling, I
thought it would be helpful to to to
have this with all the caveats that
still stand that we do have some some um
updating that has that needs to happen
as we just heard from Lynn and there's
still there's one particular year that
has a variance. it is footnoted on this
here but broadly speaking it is a way to
provide some context for that
information that was shared back in
July. So with that said, I'll distribute
that, you know, I'll pass this
>> before you do that. Um, as point of
clarification, Karen, I would it make
sense to ensure that the financial
representation is as accurate as it can
be, which would be in line, Lynn, with
the FY 2026
adjustments that still need to be made.
rather than and here's why I'm
suggesting that is that once a document
becomes a public document
and there are known variances or
discrepancies yet to be uh corrected,
it would make sense to me that we get it
corrected so that we're reasonably
accurate in what's represented.
>> I don't disagree.
Although I would I'd like to add to that
then FY2026
that the FY 2024
needs to be addressed at that time as
well because within this you know it's
it's a it's a year where there is an a
significant variance between what we was
in the budget pro system visav what was
in the the mun if I get that right Lynn
but Yeah. In that system here. So I I
think
that being said that that we we and we
and we have some time now. We have until
what October what is it the 14th when we
meet again.
>> Yeah.
>> That we could try and address that
because that anomaly that's still there
that variance. So I'm not sure where
that stands in terms of the queue of um
sorting out but
>> so okay as so noted. So, what I uh
recommend is we um let Lynn sort of
direct that process so that you're
comfortable that whatever is represented
is as accurate as we can get it to be
before we make a document public because
then for for the very reasons that I
don't I I want to discourage that people
make incorrect conclusions from
incorrect data and rather push the
timeline to get it as accurate as it can
be.
>> I totally agree. I just I think it's
important that the committee knows that
we continue to to work this to work this
so that we can really take advantage of
that budget pro particularly as it looks
at certain costs in an aggregated level.
So that is great to have that this
attention focused on that particular
uh work in process.
>> Well, as I recall, you were looking at
um large ticket items that we did not
have department heads don't have any
control over.
>> Right. and rep by the capability of
reporting within budget pro, we can look
at a five-year trend and that trending
can tell us potentially some things that
we otherwise might not have considered.
And the good news about even the
schedule as it stands right now when you
look at 2021 that ties out from both the
Muna system and budget pro and you look
at 2027 budgeted
those tie out as well. So it's just kind
of these one or two intervening years
that needs some call it you know
>> normalizing.
>> Okay.
>> So that's where that stands. So rest
assured, we've been very busy since
June,
>> right?
>> Getting excuse me, July getting on that.
>> Is the uh is there context behind
the numbers? Because as numbers, I get
it, but as we all know, there's
sometimes context as to why numbers
might have changed or why there might be
a larger gap one year versus another
year. I I don't know if you've done that
sort of research to here's what the
budget was, here's what the actual was.
And if we're trying or if we're looking
to reduce that um difference, but it
would be helpful to say, oh, 21 COVID
year um you know, budget was affected by
this or something happened in 24. I'm
just throwing something out. Something
happened in 24 which caused this
>> number of employees each year.
>> Yeah. just so that there's some context
to that number and why the gap might be
larger one year or smaller one year than
the other.
>> I think that's a great point and I
agree.
>> I think that's the the value of laying
something like this out. You actually
can identify those years or identify
those questions where some further
further looking into it is appropriate
and can draw a lesson from that. So,
I'll let the let that speak for itself
when we get to that stage. But as of
right now, I just wanted to
>> Karen, are these accurate? Are these
actual numbers or are they budget
numbers like the last sheet that came
out?
>> Well, what they're both includes
the the budget and actual,
>> right? Thank you.
>> For those particular accounts. Yeah.
Yeah.
>> Okay. Uh any other business?
Okay.
>> Um, so I did actually have to write this
down. So I just I'm just going to read
this. Um, so before we disperse tonight,
uh, I just want to acknowledge that this
Friday is the 25th anniversary of
September 11th. Um, and I ask that we
remember the thousands of lives that
were lost.
um and the incredible bravery of the
first responders who ran towards that.
Um as a committee, one of our missions
is to ensure that our local first
responders
have the resources, equipment, and
backing that they need to keep us safe
every day. Um so I just want to ask that
we hold a moment of silence um to honor
all those who were lost. um and to show
our gratitude for the men and women who
serve our community now.
Thank you.
And I would invite everyone to join us
down at New London Fire Department this
Friday, 11:00 a.m. for a Patriot Day.
The word celebration is very strange to
say commemoration. Um but you know when
we started this 25 years ago or 24 years
ago we had said you know we'll go to
year 25. Um I know that New London Fire
is talking internally about whether they
continue it. Um but it is a very special
absolutely is a very special event and
we hope that you all can join us.
Thank you and thank you Kim. Um any
other new business?
I have only one other comment. Um the
subject of department data documents. Um
those have been shared with Ashley.
Ashley shared them with the department
leads and heads and they will be
returned in a couple of weeks or so.
They're working to update those. So once
we we receive those they will be
distributed to the committee and if
there's need for clarification and or um
modification
um we can do that at at at a later time.
I Charlie uh one of the requests in
addition to that so I did send those out
to the department heads um and also uh
put together some draft uh
organizational charts for those
departments that have teams underneath
them. Um so I put together the first
pass and just asked them to uh make sure
that I got it right. Um it doesn't have
names on it. it merely has positions and
if there is a role if there's a position
that has multiple people um then that
headcount number is reflected on there
so those will also be included as well.
>> Thank you very much for doing that.
>> Sure.
>> Much appreciated.
>> Any other business
hearing? None. I uh accept a motion to
adjourn.
>> So move.
>> All in favor?
>> I thank you all for your time. Lou wants
to stay.