Finance Committee - Regular Meeting

So it's seven zero 1. So if we Alright. Okay. Could call to order. This is the Thursday, 04/16/2026 meeting of the finance committee in the seven in in the small conference room starting at 07:00. And this will be recorded by MCAM, I'm sure, and be broadcast at some other further point. Can we come for the pledge of allegiance, please?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

No minutes.

The meeting was just last night. We're gonna go over what we did at at some point. We did last but there are no minutes. So we have a review and discussion of the FY '27 budget. We have with us this evening the interim town manager, mister Perkins.

Thank you, doctor Chair. Today, the cherry sheet dropped and was updated. Unfortunately, there's no significant gain to the number. The deficit will be reduced slightly, 50 to $60 approximately. I haven't really crunched all the numbers, but just doing a quick look at it.

Like I said, it's not very significant. We are still looking at, cost saving issues, that the town can examine and try and realize before July 1 aside from addressing the deficit itself and the operate and its impact on the operating budgets. So I'm I'm hopeful that we can find some savings in some other areas. Again, it's top priority, the budget all day every day. And, you know, obviously, trying to look at other areas aside from expenditures where operating budget expenditures where we can save some money.

And I think it's it's important that we look in every corner of the budget to try and save money because we're impacting people's lives. And I think they need to know that we are trying to do everything. For example, insurance, property liability for the town, looking at see if we can get some some quotes to try and reduce that liability. I don't know if we can or we'll be able to, but I at least need to say we did it. Impact bargaining continues with police, two police unions, fire union, GMEG, clerical, library.

We've met with library once. We plan to meet again. We've met with police twice. We have the final impact session Tuesday or Wednesday of next week. Fire, we've met twice. Final impact session is tomorrow. GMEG, we have met once, and we're trying to wrap up session two and three next

Tuesday.

Clerical, we had one and two, and we have great talks and communications and hope to come to some type of impact MOU with clerical either tomorrow or Tuesday. Well, it might be getting I did GMAT one time. That's it. But Library. Library was once.

I'm not sure. I I thought it was a good meeting. Again, it's a good meeting about a difficult situation, so take that for what's worth. But we'll see who can do that.

Any questions from the members?

I have one related question with regard to once cuts do happen to a large extent, there's obviously going to be, you know, fewer employees to, you know, carry the load. We have talked a lot about in this committee and outside of the committee this the half day Friday thing. And my thought was, will the taxpayers be able to access the employees services if that continues? Or will it be detrimental to, the taxpayer if that half day process continues? And if it's not going to be something that we can, ask the select board to consider, what would what would your thoughts be on that?

And this is just a surprise question. It wasn't something I had anticipated. But

I understand the question. That was one of my principles as a taxpayer in the community, understanding that this is this financial crisis is going to impact services being delivered by the town to the community. Yep. One of the number one priorities I looked at in assessing the budgets, looking at places to save money. One of my priorities, it had been suggested by several people to reduce hours.

Mhmm. I don't feel personally, as a resident, that's fair to the residents. I think it's important that we try and maintain the best as close to possible level services after July 1 that we currently do to today. With the Friday's noontime issue, I was under the, impression that this was something that was in place three years now, four. In the half day Friday, it's the time is made up of staying open late on Monday.

So people who work during the day can come and access any town services at night. If it's thirty six and a half hours or forty, whatever the people are required to work, they're getting the hours in. And to limit those hours is not an op I don't think it's a viable option as opposed to looking at places where, okay, there may be less workers in the office, but the work still needs to get done. It may be slower. A lot of departments do have some automation.

Again, that was part of the request made to the department heads for an impact on cuts to their department. For example, library. The library is currently open fifty four hours a week. They need to maintain fifty hours a week to, maintain their accreditation or certification. I'm not sure of the term. Either way, the fifty hour minimum is tied to that. And if they dip below fifty hours, then we lose state aid.

Right. Right.

So that is not a department where you can look at a cut and say, okay. We're gonna take x amount of dollars from them because that x amount of dollars might mean three employees.

Right.

And they're already staffed at a minimum where they can stay open fifty four hours a week with the rotation of librarians. So looking at a cut there, you need to be able to identify an area of for a cut that isn't detrimental to the town. Right. And looking at the contract of the librarians, speaking with them during impact. Those are the types of discussions that we're having in impact bargaining. So to address your question

Yeah.

That's not something I am willing to do to cut services to the town by reducing hours that the the the town hall or town office is available to service members of the community.

Thank you. And then the if I may, just the other side of that is the expense quotient, which is overtime. And I know all departments are now looking at this very closely as they should. Because I think that if you had a half a day, and I guess it depends on how contracts are written, whether it's an eight hour day and then eight hours and one minute is overtime, or if it's for the week and then there's overtime. On the expense side of it, you have if you send people away and I get that there's gonna be emergencies. We all get that. And I get that there's gonna be overtime. Totally understandable. And people should get it when they can get it. Totally get that.

But if we if we allow a half a day piece, even if it's sort of made up in another area, if we send employees away for the day and then they're having to be recalled for something that's probably could have been done during the day and not be an overtime case.

As if you're saying close close available office hours.

Yeah.

Is that what you're saying?

Yeah. I'm not in favor of that.

Right. Yeah.

And and and that is one reason why, but I think the most important reason is the community's ability to access services. Yeah. So that I think is still we need to maintain that, the level that we have or close to it. Understandably, there's a $3,000,000 deficit

Yep.

That that may be possible to do. However, the efficiency of timely service might be, I think, more of the the results of a cut versus the access to get that. It may take a little longer to get what you're asking for Right. But you can make the request in person and at least stop the process. Yep. Again, having that forward facing availability as a town to the community is, I think, one of the most important things the town could do. Agreed.

Mister Jack, I just wanted to add. You you mentioned the, you know, that the important thing is that the availability for the residents to, I guess, have have these services in town. But I guess my oldest the other side of that coin is the ability for the departments to actually perform those services is what I'm also concerned with with as as of the fallout from some of these cuts. I think that's something that we have to

Again, looking at every department. Yep. And and, you know, trying to get the department heads. Again, this is the process. What's the impact of a cut? Mhmm. The department head is the person that's going to be that's best explain what they need to do their job, what to run their office, what to run their department, getting their input. That's all I'm looking as I'm talking to them, or when I was talking to them, their baseline. What's the baseline?

What

is you know, obviously, any cut, it's gonna impact services or the way they do things. You know, what's a critical cut where you can't continue to do something? We've had those conversations. If we for example, if we continue to do x and you cut me, I won't be able to do x anymore. Okay.

Let's come up with a plan to do y. Mhmm. And I I believe I have a a one particular situation like that that's that we can demonstrate to the community. Is it an inconvenience? The inconvenience is the best way I could describe is sentimental. It's a sentimental inconvenience for one particular option that we're looking at. Is it gonna save a lot of money? No. We're looking at, like, $20. But $20 is $20, and it's not a person.

Mhmm. So those are the types of things we're looking at everything. And when I say we, I get that input from the department head, and then I look at the number. Mister Phillips?

Through the chair. Thank you, interim town manager Perkins. Speaking of cuts, I've had conversations with some people, town employees, who have expressed concern that they feel, you know, specifically police officers, saying that their department is realistically looking to take a bigger hit than the fire department. And one of the reasons why that was mentioned was because of the SAFR grant, firefighters who were hired by way of the SAFR grant. As we all know, the SAFR grant came with strings attached.

You had to maintain those firefighters for a certain period of time. Otherwise, we would have to we would forfeit that money, have to return the money back. So, personally, I don't think that's fair that if it's if it's gonna be look. I'm not saying you are, but I don't think that's fair if one department is treated better by way of cuts than another department merely because there's a issue of a grant that we're saying, well, you know, we really don't wanna have to cut these people and then also have to pay. It's gonna be cost prohibitive cost prohibitive, potentially, when we have to return this money.

So my question is, how much money would we are we looking at that we would have to return? If we did, this is just hypothetical. If we did cut because I believe it would be those firefighters. I think those are the most junior employees on the department. So they would be the first to go in you know, if it came to that.

In 02/1945, the police department had a burn grant

Okay.

That police officers were hired with federal money. Right. Ironically, coincidentally, that year, we had a budget crisis. They couldn't lay off the police officers. Marshall Brunell, chair of the board, at that time said the town will never take another federal grant for personnel ever again because of the situation they put that the police department was protected. Mhmm. 2012, chief Benjamino got the SAFR grant for 10 firefighters. The town said, no. The the future long term liability is too much. They said no.

Somehow, we got a SAFR grant after the town's commitment not to take federal money just for this reason. So, yes, we cannot cut the safer grant. This is the that particular topic. I I have some documentation on that that I would I would share with you that I I think I can. It's a department budget. It's not personnel, but it's involved. If you can give me a minute, I'll get it. But I don't know if you if we might this might be a deep dive. I don't know. Would you you want me to grab that information? I I feel comfortable talking about it. It's not names and people. It's a budget of a department. Before that. Okay.

We'll come right back. Okay. You didn't have your hand up. If you wanna wait or you wanna

Well, this is a slight pivot. Maybe you can ask answer quickly through the chair to to Joe. I was just curious about what comes back in this impact bargaining process. Do do you get proposal from each department? And I guess I'm not familiar with the whole process, and

I just The process is we identify a deficit. Yep. We seek input from the department heads. Show me what a five, ten, and 20 in cut impact looks like on your department. They bring the number. They go through their budget. They say this I cannot, you know, continue to do x with this cut. There's a conversation. That's all it is. I take it under advisement.

I look at it. Get all the information together. I go through, and I I I looked at, again, forward facing department's impact on, you know, residents and, you know, that that that Kevin Bacon effect. Who how many people get affected by this one department? And that's really my priority looking at it first as, okay, this department is important for people's belief of having services provided to them, feeling safe, having a good school, going to the clerk's office and getting the birth certificate, picking up the trash, getting the roads plowed.

Those are the things that people care about. And that's kinda how I I was looking at it and then looking at positions that, you know, are newer or maybe, you know, this is a very unique position that, you know, no other town has. Is that a necessity? Those types of things, that's how I looked at going through the budget.

Okay. So you

And then so that impact and those conversations, then I came up with a draft, and it was every person that could possibly be considered for a layoff. And that is following, label mass label law and collective bargaining units. We have to tell the union that this is a potential, a possibility that this union member of of member of your union may lose their job, and we need to impact bargaining. Will they take concessions? Is there a a bump in process?

Is it by seniority? All these things, there's a back and forth, and there has been great back and forth. And, you know, what and they've asked for more information about, okay. What's the headcount of the other unions? You know, how much money is this gonna save with this cut? Give us this number for this union. If you're planning on cutting our union, our number is what? Then they wanna know what the other union's numbers are, so they take all the information. They look. It's verifying that there's a deficit.

A couple of the unions have mentioned they went out and verified, going through the numbers themselves, and they agree. They understand. It doesn't make the process any better. We provide that information to them. One. Two, they come back. There's some back and forth. And then three, we either come to an agreement and issue an MOU between the town and the union based on the outcome of a cut. So if we're cutting through, you know, three women from the clerical unit and one comes from a department that can sustain a cut, but they're senior to another person in another department. There's bumping.

So there's it's like I said before, it's a hitting a moving target. It's Jenga trying

to get it all to work.

But you essentially get a proposal from from each

I did get that was one of the first things I did. Yep. But union's back. Yes. They get their proposals. And if we can't come to an agreement, we're at an impasse, and we move forward. Do do you feel the proposals you've gotten so far

would get us to where we need to be?

I think they understand that cuts have to happen. Yeah. Okay. They they don't they prefer not to happen. But, again, it's looking at it and trying to follow the collective bargaining agreement and whatever specifics each union's different. Some can bump based on seniority. Some have strict, you know, last in, first out. Some have no rights. There's a lot of different again, it's union specific.

Okay. Thank you, Jack. Jack.

But just I I would like to before we get to that, you asked the question, would we be interested in deep dive, informal? Will you folks feel that that would be I think it would be important, but I don't wanna make that

Yeah. I think so. Yes. Yeah.

Alright. You could do that.

Sure. I got a phone

can you wait now? Or you wanna

Oh, yeah. Well, yeah. You're getting the fire department stuff? Okay. That's it's relative to that, so I'll I'll wait.

Through the chair. Very quickly oh, I went to the recording secretary. Never mind.

And I will I'll put you back.

She she I mean, relative to the the IDM is here for

the Yep.

Okay. Unless you wanna listen to him first, maybe he's gonna answer a lot what? Of questions. It's It's up up to to you. You.

No. Just a quick question. I know they mentioned the through you, mister chair. I know you mentioned earlier the about the safer grant. Has that been evaluated in terms of winding back what we received in federal federal aid for the grant as a a possibility to, you know, possibly, I guess, cut those positions?

So my understanding is if we were to impact any staffing levels of firefighters firefighters, then we would be responsible for paying back the safer grant.

Do you know what that is off of?

This is the problem. I do. But I need to explain it all. Is in my opinion, this is the most mismanaged department in the town. So I guess I'll just

Can I throw something out there real quick? Just piggybacking on what Nate had mentioned. So from my research, it's the SAFR grants that they're operating on a drawdown system so you don't get like one big lump sum all at one time.

Correct. Hire people x amount at six Yep. For this particular grant. Yep. And then the FEMA gives you money to pay their salaries. Tied to actual expenses. Right. Money stops. Right. Mhmm.

And then the town picks up the tab for the rest. Yep. So trying to make the determination on this budget and looking at it, the first thing that I had a problem with is in the budget book. The budget book reflects by pay line 26 firefighters, five lieutenants, four captains, and one chief, not including the chief. I have I come up with 35 people.

I know that this 41 with one vacant spot that they were about to hire the week I came aboard, and that conditional offer employment

was rescinded. Because of what's going on. So we had

Yes. 35

people in the book, but 41 on the payroll?

I think there's 42. 42 on payroll. Wow. Because they were making an offer that we rescinded. Got you. Okay. It went out the next day. We rescinded it. Looking at so I'm trying to do I'm reconciling the budget, trying to identify where everything is. And the numbers in the budget book do not match the payroll and the department headcount.

Excuse me. Through the chip, how is that possible? I don't know.

That's why I said it's the most mismanaged department in the town. Seven employees unaccounted for? At least six. Most likely seven. So here's I understand what it is.

The grant pays for these additional six firefighters. They have been on the department since, without naming names, 01/13/2025, 02/17/2025, one two three four, five of them. One of them was high in January. The other five were high in February 2025. Somebody, and I don't know because the names aren't listed, The head count doesn't match, maybe by seven.

So I know that they get paid through the SAFA grant. The problem is in a year, thirteen, fourteen months they've been working, we've only gotten a $162,000 in the grant. If six firefighters making them a minimum of 70, that math doesn't work. The math's not math. And I don't believe I believe this is misleading and not listing the entire department in the budget and at least making a notation that there were six employees that were covered under money.

I I don't know why it's this way. I wouldn't do it this way, and I don't think anyone in this room

would do it that way.

I don't know if there's an appetite to pay the $162,000 back to the federal government and make cuts. That would severely impact the staffing levels. The other issues that I have problem with, and I don't know why unless I miss something in town in 2025. Expended over overtime for 2025 for the Middleborough Fire Department is $895,000. Their allotted overtime line is $316,000.

890. 90 according to the budget book. This is in the budget book.

This was the one prior

to you. Prior to you. Fire department overtime, fiscal year '25, page one thirteen, column one, FY '25 projected actual. I don't know why the word projected's there. It should be actual. 08/1945. I wanna put that in context. 2025, Plymouth Fire Department, they do not run an ambulance service. Their expended over over time was 1,100,000. 2025, the city of New Bedford fire department, no ambulance, 1,100,000.

2025, the town of Bridgewater, with an ambulance, they do run the ambulance service, they have more people, they expended $739,000. 2025, Mansfield fire with an ambulance expended $521,000 in overtime.

Just to kind of expand upon that, I went back and I I pulled up the fiscal year '24 recommended budget, and overtime pay for the fire department was 281,442. I don't know if that's if there's another line item for overtime on here, because I double checked it, but that's what I have going back. So somewhere between then and now, you're talking the overtime has tripled. Yes. Thank you.

And then as of this year, when I checked last week, it was over $700,000. Just in overtime?

Yep. Can I make a suggestion to the chair? Yes. Could I make a suggestion that any liaison does the same exercise? It looks like Joe's done where he's compared employee counts to what's in the budget book because the tie into that is when you go to the budget book, I don't know what page it's the payroll page, at a very high level, it's very concerning because the schedule a, which is the Department of Revenue numbers that the town would have submitted to the Department of Revenue, I'm just gonna call out four numbers and give you the comparisons.

In the budget book prior to interim Perkins here, fiscal year twenty

two You say you're talking about FY '27 budget book?

Yeah. The one yeah. The one

yes. Sorry.

Yeah. No. It's okay. Fiscal year twenty two, the budget book has $47,000,005.00 $1.04 93 for payroll. In schedule a, at the Department of Revenue, it was reported as $45,000,003.41 $7.66, so it was underreported.

In fiscal year twenty three, the payroll at again at a high level is $51,017,007.95. The schedule a and department of revenue records is $48,000,001.62 $6.71. Again, it's underreported by about $2,000,000. Fiscal year twenty four in the budget book, it's listed as $54,000,001.94 $6.00 8. It was reported to schedule a as $52,210,001.00 3.

But my biggest concern and the alarm bell that's ringing in addition to those underreported payroll figures is that in fiscal year twenty five, in the budget book, it's listed as payroll $57,000,008.42 $9.46. But the Department of Revenue is already saying it was reported by the town of Middleborough that was $65,149,789. That's why I would recommend through the chair that we have a a good payroll audit because I don't know if there's other issues like that in other departments. I don't know. But when you have a discrepancy of $2,000,000 a year for three fiscal years where it's apparently underreported in the budget book prior to interim Perkins getting here.

And then all of a sudden it catches up to you in fiscal year twenty five and you state that it's 57,000,000 when in reality it's 65,000,000. That tells me there's a lot more people getting paid than what appears to be in the book.

As it pertains to the fire department, I'm the liaison for the fire department. I had previously met with chief Thompson. That was obviously before we realized that we had a major issue with the budget. I'm sorry. Just subsequently, I've reached out to interim fire chief Fontane.

Dana Fontane. Just to bring everybody up to speed, I have requested from him the last three years actual overtime expenditures, last three years total payroll expended, including headcount, and also the last three years, vehicle maintenance and repair invoices and receipts.

And you repeat the middle one, please, actual overtime expenses. Expenditures.

Yeah. First one was actual overtime expenditures for the last three years.

Yep.

Actual total payroll for the last three years and headcount. Yep. And then the last one was

Maintenance records and

Maintenance of repair, invoices, and receipts for the

last three years. Thank you. Can I make it just a to the tone?

Yep.

But it it we need to get information. I'm just questioning. Should we channel that through the town manager to

be part of that? I I have no problem doing that. My issue is this. I need to get to this thing. I need it's a 100 pages. I'm going through the old budget book with a black marker and highlight is, and I'm crossing. And I have to update it. And for some reason, I need to send it to Iowa or somewhere in Central, United States for some guy to edit it because it's not ours. So I need to have this done by Thursday, Friday, and then this person has to have it for Monday night, a 100 pages, every department edited. I don't have time.

I appreciate that, and I think you're right. I would appreciate the help of, you know, the board. That's why I've been saying this the whole time. My question to you as a committee through you, how and and you might not have the answer, and I am tapping into my network of budget people. How do we first of all, how we obviously, this budget is wrong for the fire department.

You can't pay 43, 44 because we have an interim. The butt the number the budget number's wrong because we don't get we don't have grant money. So how and where is the extra money coming from and how are we spending $900 in all? It just it it doesn't work out. How do I demonstrate in the book in the correction plan, a budget of $4,700,000 with six more people who they're getting paid, but I don't know with what money.

Where where's the money? How have we been paying six people for a year when we only had $1.62 and we're spending at least $4.20?

Mister Through the chair. Reason why I'm asking this for these records just so everybody is clear, when we had the discussion about bringing on firefighters by way of the safer grant, it was communicated that this is gonna reduce the overtime. Because now you've got more hands carrying the load. It's more people. So there should be an inverse relationship as the headcount goes up.

The overtime should go down, covering for holiday or vacations and sick sick time and all injury, all that stuff. But it appears that hasn't been the case. The the overtime has stayed you know, has actually increased.

So I I I wanna address that because while there's 42 people, three of them are in the academy. While they're in the academy, they're getting paid. That's not including the ones that got hired last January and February. These people have been recently hired, but we're still paying them. Right. But but I don't know how. And they're not in the budget book. They were hired. They're in the academy now. They would have been employees when this budget was put together. So not only is there sick people, yeah, sick people. I don't know how it falls. So either three in the academy on in the book or three of the the six that are hired off the safety grant on in the book. I I don't know. The head count's off by six, minimum. I don't know how we're paying those six people.

And how much did you say today we've received by way of

the 162 doll 162,000. It might be $1.63. It's one sixty something. The other issue is so addressing the manpower versus overtime. That is always been the dilemma in any public safety agency.

The issue becomes this. When this these let's say, 40 I'll call it 40. So not including the chief, not including the administrative captain, not including the vacant position, 29 or 40. The fire department runs four four groups, four squads. Divide that number by 40 is an average of 10 guys on a shift. I don't know why you need overtime. I mean, how many staffing levels? I mean, two two offs two firefighters on a truck? That's five trucks.

I I wanna say I I recall chief Thompson saying that minimum staffing, like, gotta have eight. I think it was eight, I think is what he said, to maintain. You know? So 10 is two more.

Then who set eight? Thirty years ago, we had South State Station open all the time when I was a patrolman. Stop there and visit the firefighter. One one firefighter I understand one one firefighter on a truck is not safe. They can run two. You don't need three. What we used to have call men.

Call men.

Yeah. We drive the five trucks to the scene, hit the thing, all the call men come out, but which is another issue in the budget that we need to talk about. Glad you brought

Yeah. For Andrew K.

I'm glad you brought that up because that's where I was going the next thing tied into this. So I happened to be a nerd, and I was reviewing the February 9 select board meeting where the fire department budget was presented. And Glenn Montepard got up and asked a question. And he said, I see in the current well, the 2027 budget book, he said he saw Pay Coleman. And Can

you cite the page just so

people Yes. It's page one o well One thirteen. In my book, it's 108. It's 113. Oh, it's one zero eight in my book.

Yeah. Because I Okay.

Wow. You're one of the first first versions.

Yeah. So One thirteen. We should've known them right then and there that something was severely off in pages and not lining up, but I digress. So, anyway, page one thirteen, 300,000 for Payne Coleman. Glenn Montepard asked the question, what is the pay Coleman? He said, oh, that's the safer grant money. And so Glenn had a follow-up question where he said, is this something we've been doing in the past, meaning last year? And he's, oh, no. No. No.

No. Last year was under I forget what Jay said. He he he referenced some other line in the bio department budget. Pardon the expression, but I called BS because I said, I remember last year specifically asking about the pay call, man. And I said, it was my understanding we don't have call firefighters. And it was told to me then, that's the safer grant money.

That's good. Does they said it was the money that they were holding aside to be prepared to cover safer grant employment.

Correct. But

that money rolls doesn't it roll back into

the budget at end of

the year? We were told it wasn't gonna be pay they weren't it was just a placeholder. Yep. Basically, that money was going there just as a placeholder. But the point being is that they said last year oh, no. Jay said on February 9 that, nope. It was somewhere else in the fire department budget. And I know for a fact because I asked that very question about the pay call, and and Jay told me in no uncertain terms that that was a safer grant money. So It

is not safer grant money. It is taxpayer money added to the fire department budget to offset the shortfall that will occur when the safety grant runs out. Again, we don't have a clear picture of how this impacts the fire department due to the miss misleading budget presentation, so I couldn't tell you. But I know that that money was added into the budget. It is not federal funds.

It is that middle borrower taxpayer dollars to build up their budget. If you have six employees added, they're getting funded. They should be getting funded with the federal money. At some point, that money is gonna stop, and you're gonna have a deficit in that operating budget as long as you keep putting money that you can't use, but just make it look good on paper. So when the federal money goes out, you will have a big buffer and a safe landing.

Mhmm.

So you're putting an extra $300 in there. I don't know what happened prior to that, but that was the plan for next year, and I'm not giving them the money.

Mhmm. Can you mister sorry. Go into the chair. Be all for mister Kirschenbach. Sorry.

No. It's back and forth. That was me.

Through through through the chair to Joe. So I I think this kind of builds on a question you had, John, was do we have a draw schedule for that grant? Because I I think that grant was 2,300,000.

I have seen the draw schedule. Okay.

And we're at $1.62.

We're at $1.62.

So it should schedule

It should be $500,000 for them told. We're owed 400 and some thousand dollars, which would map up if you look at six people making an average of $70,000.

So that's the the overtime swing?

I I don't know. I again, I am befuddled at this budget.

John? Yeah.

Yeah. Thank you. And that doesn't even correct me if I'm wrong. That, you know, you called out the overtime, then you called out the extra money, and we don't know whether where we're getting that for the salaries. I'm assuming that you still have to add the benefit load on top of that. Right? I mean, because they're making benefits, aren't they?

That wouldn't be in in the budgeted side. That would be in the calculated side of the budget where you're looking at employee benefits line.

Yeah. Fringe benefits.

I have no idea if that I would assume that has been calculated. I guess I'm gonna have to check that now that you bring it up.

Thank you.

I would assume that. Again, I I hope so. Yeah. It's because they're on the payroll. This is the issue, and I have this. They're on the payroll. That's the crazy part. But they're not reflected in the budget book. I'm I'm going by this is the number I'm I'm I'm looking at. Yep. And it didn't add up. And I had to use multicolor highlighters to try and figure it out. And this, I'm confident in. I did the police department budget for eleven years. This is a smaller budget.

This is not good. Yeah. So maybe just two things I wanted to point out, but then I guess the statement. Vehicle maintenance, $25,000 difference. I just like to

let let them know a little

bit more about what's gone into that. I think that's pretty consistent when you go back to So '24.

I'm glad you brought that up. I have that one highlighted. Fiscal year actual for vehicle maintenance is a $102,000. Yep. Budgeted for this fiscal year is 101.

It went down by 750 maybe. The request for next year is an additional $25,000. How do you know you're gonna have $25,000 in repair repairs when you've had maintained two years of level. The other issue, hose replacement. If you look at on page one fourteen, projected actual '25 or actual, we need to remove the projected word.

Mhmm.

Again, it's not accurate. $2,734 for hose replacement. '26 budgeted, $32,000. 27 request, $32,000. Now I know coincidentally that they just received nine pallets of hose. It was I was called by one of the officers and said they had nine pallets of hose and didn't have anywhere to put it, which is a whole another discussion.

Mhmm.

So I talked to once chief Fontaine took took command, I asked him, did you find a place for the nine pallets of replacement hose? Yes. Did you use the $32,000 in the budget? He believes it was purchased under a grant. So I can honestly say I've asked him, do you need $32,000 going to hose next year? No.

So that's a cut right there. So more than

you want mister Phillips, you had your hand up or not? Or you wanna just I'm just have just

to wrap my head around this. I I no. I didn't have my hand up. I was just like Alright.

Go ahead, mister Dubois.

I just to kinda go back. That was your hands. That was one thing. The other one was the career incentive going up to, you know, another additional 65,000. Again, that's

a cost a contractual issue. Unfortunately, those are The decree. They're bound in writing, and

that's what they get. And and one last thing. I think if there's any department in town that needs a forensic audit is this one. So, you know, I would make a I would make a motion to recommend to the select board that they do a forensic audit on the fire department. That's my recommendation.

Mister chair?

May I?

To the are you are you addressing the request? Or just let's let's go to your question first.

Sure. Okay.

I will not forget that

Yep. Okay. Yeah. No. And I don't wanna skip over Nate's

point. Thank you.

And that wasn't my intent. I'm trying to get it up before I forget my own point, which I wrote down. The other side of that, which is, again, the recommendation to do a headcount audit because we've talked about the salary piece being very discrepant. And then I read these numbers off at the select board meeting. I'm gonna read them off here because I want them in the record.

In the head count page, again, in the book prior to Interim Perkins getting here, I don't know what page it's gonna be on everyone's book, but it's a bar chart head count. The schedule a number to the Department of Revenue for fiscal year twenty two was 1,206. The budget book reflects a number of 1,113. That's a difference of 93 heads. Fiscal year '23, the schedule a reported number was 1284.

The budget book number says 1,279. It's a difference of five heads. Fiscal year '24, we actually flip it. Schedule a is a thousand and three, but the budget book says 1,286. So that's a difference of 283 heads.

That may be some election, I'm not sure, impact, but I don't know. It's a very large swing. And then for fiscal '25, we revert back to the same trend that we saw in '22 and '23 where we had schedule a, there was 1,335 heads. And in the budget book, it says 1,258 heads, and that's a net difference of 77. So across four fiscal years, there's wild fluctuations in headcount that are not consistent with the schedule a prior reporting.

And I would also say that for a budget book that's based in for fiscal year '27, that fiscal year '22, that should be a dead on match. Those numbers were closed years ago. Fiscal year '23, that should be a dead on match. Those numbers were closed years ago. Fiscal year '24 should be a dead on match. Those numbers were closed years ago. And fiscal '25, which unfortunately we're still waiting on, we're ten plus months post audit, that still shouldn't have a difference of 77 heads. I mean, my opinion, they'd probably be they should match.

That's the full time count. Right?

That's the Headcount. Head count. The total head count that the yeah. On that chart.

The schedule a, it's full time employee head count. Is that the one that I pulled or is there a different I'm just making sure.

Oh, I I had to look

at the one you pulled. Okay. I'm just going off of the schedule. It probably is the same thing.

Yeah.

I would imagine because we probably got it in the same location.

Yeah. Because I put it when I put it in there. Think I just wanted to see because when I recap this and

Matter of fact, hold on that thought. Are you gonna email it to quick second. One quick second. Because I actually have I actually have if you pulled it from

should be a tab on it.

This like right here. I know it's gonna be hard to see, but it's that.

Yeah. That's where

I go.

Yep. That's where go. Okay. Yep. So we're just apples to apples, making sure.

The division of local service website.

Yeah. So that's the division of local services website.

Scheduling is a full time employee headcount. Yeah. Believe is what it reports as. It's not part time. So I'm only saying this because election people shouldn't be in there because they're part time.

Good

be full time. Good call call Yeah. Including school. Yeah.

Right. People wondering 1,200 employees. It includes the school.

Yep. Yep. I don't want to interrupt the flow, but there was someone who Yeah. Put a motion. Can you repeat that?

Yeah. I would make the motion that we recommend to the select board that we perform a forensic audit on the fire department for fiscal year twenty six. I don't if you can do fiscal year twenty seven as well.

That's '7 has Yeah.

So '26.

'25

and '26. '25 and '26. Exactly.

Is there a second? So let me just I'll I'll

second just for discussion. I I I am Okay.

So so I'm sorry. So, Jennifer, there was a second for discussion. Okay. Yeah.

My my my concern with requesting a forensic audit is we don't know what the cost is. We don't I don't think we understand quite yet the nature of what we're finding here. I I think it would be helpful to get maybe through this process first. We gotta we gotta go forward, fix that in Sears fiscal budget, and then let's revisit that discussion whether or not we need a forensic audit.

Well, mister Jeff, I can respond through you. I think this is just a recommend I think from my understanding, from what I'm seeing is there's, you know, there's a lot of smoke to this, not to put a pun, but there's a lot of smoke from what I'm seeing from fiscal year '23 to '24 to to '25, that there's a lot of numbers there that I have serious concerns about. And and my motion is to not for us to expend the money for a forensic audit. It is to recommend that the select board review this. And if they wanna run with it and and find out what the costs are and do the forensic audit, it's on the select board to figure out the the how they you know, how it's paid for.

And I understand, like, it doesn't necessarily help us in the here and now, but I think that for how I mean, a budget in fiscal year twenty four where their total budget is 4,360,000 and it jumps up to 5.9 in, you know, three, four years, I think it's worth looking into a little bit more in-depth.

I think mister Phil will maybe

I was just gonna say is, you know, with that, I feel it's kinda premature to even identify fire department because there very well could be other departments that are gonna be worthy of further scrutiny. So I don't know if it's I think it might be worth waiting to see what else develops as it pertains to it.

I'm all

just so we're clear, I'm all for a forensic audit. I've been seeing questionable numbers for over two years now, and I don't think this is relegated to simply the fire department. So that's my 2¢ on

it. Mister Burrow?

I would agree with both Nate and Matt. I think that there are a lot of systemic issues that we've been calling out for several years. I like Nate's approach on putting some things together on a list. I think to Matt's point, it's premature. I think we should probably do it all together instead of piecemeal.

But I like Nate's thought process. Not to Agreed. Not to exclude what Alan's saying. And I've I've put together some research on forensic audits, scope, depth, cost, what they might cover, how long they might take. So through the chair, I will email it so it can be distributed amongst the committee so they can get a better understanding of what a forensic audit actually may entail.

Because we hear a lot of things, whether it's on social media, whether we hear it in other committees, what it is, what it isn't. I'm certainly not an expert of it. I've just done the research on it, and I've seen it done in private sector. So I prepared some information so that we as a committee can all have sort of the same talking points. So to Alan's point, I think it would be good to get get that in your hands, and I'll I'll send that out tonight.

My comment is meant we we need to understand the scope.

Yeah. Agreed. Yeah. For sure.

So we have a motion seconded. We had discussions or any further discussion?

Just to kinda go on that. Agree you know, I do agree. Like I said, like, this is definitely worthy of much more scrutiny, especially when we have a major discrepancy with manpower, headcount. Like, that's in the town manager doesn't know how they're being funded. That's a that's a huge red flag to me.

The overtime, another huge red flag. So and the only thing, like I said, is it's not to diminish the motion, but I think when we go forward with this, then it's gonna be like, well, what if we you know, it's just a procedural thing where it's like, if we say we wanna audit the fire department, well, we're gonna get a number. What what a forensic audit would be for the fire department? Well and then later on you know? So then, you know, whoever's I I believe it's Tara Pirelli. She's the one that's doing the RFP for the forensic audit. Am I correct in that? She's seeking

Why is that the She's seeking quotes certified audit companies that are on the state bid list. Okay. Because the audit's exempt from an RFP.

Oh, okay. Okay. Thank you for clarifying that. So to anyway, all I'm saying is, like, once we get a better idea of, like, you know, all the departments that may be worthy of being scrutinized by way of a forensic audit, then I think that would be the appropriate time because then we would have much clearer picture and a better idea of what the scope, depth, and detail of the Friends of Audit is gonna be. And, again, I I think that's, to John's point, one of the things, there are different cost levels based on the depth you wanna go, the scope, you know, and the scale of it. How far back?

Is it

strictly one fiscal year? Is it the last five fiscal years? So on and so forth. So there's a lot there's a lot to that is yet to be determined by way of that. So that's why I think, for my opinion, we should just put a placeholder on that.

Anyone else on discussion? Jess, could you read the motion that we were just discussing?

It's a motion that the finance committee recommend that the select board of the fire department to have a forensic audit for Nate and I had a question mark twenty five and twenty six?

Yes. So does this discuss has the discussion that we have just had regarding this motion cause anyone to have a different focus?

Well, I've chair. I guess what I would say is that I don't think it's something that the select board is gonna act on on Monday. So, you know, if we wanna add the caveat that, you know, we say don't act on this, we may have more departments coming. But I think we should very at the very least let them know that this is something that we've identified that needs to be investigated further for sure.

Is there a change of

No. I would still I would still look to have a vote on it, there's nothing saying that we can't have another vote on it on a future date.

There was always the option to if the discussion leads to a certain method of happening on what the issue is, someone can always withdraw the motion.

I'll I'll I'll withdraw the motion hearing enough from everybody else that we're gonna vote on this on a future date.

Can I can I just make a comment?

The second would have to. One second?

Do I have

to unsecond? Or Yeah. You have to

just sorry.

Yep. Yes. I unsecond, I think, what you want. Or Resend. Resend my second. So

so we have reached a point where the motion has been made, has been discussed, has brought out a lot of information that I think is pertinent. So we're on record of recognizing there's a difficulty Mhmm. But we're we're holding moving forward in a motion at this time. Mhmm. Thank you. Mhmm. Yes.

Mister Chair, through you and everyone else, any recommendations on how I should? It's easy to go through the budget book and cross off and adjust, unfortunately, and that's the most horrible thing I have to do. But when I come to this budget, I can't cross off, I have to add. Any recommendations on how I can demonstrate the best way to demonstrate this? I I I don't again, we have 43 people on the books.

I'm showing 35. How do I write that in a book using the current template I have? I don't I can't edit it. Should I just add another page and say white out?

With with just the fifth.

And I don't know. The numbers aren't gonna come out. Right?

Your hand was up first and then Nate, his hand was so you couldn't see it.

My recommendation would be going back on experience working with auditing in a corporate environment that there's just like in your CAFR or your adjusted financial statements that are being audited, there's always a section for management discussion and analysis. In this instance, for your municipal setting, it's a management letter. I would probably put it very clearly at the very front of the budget book. I would write a letter in that budget book stating what you've just talked about and describe the challenge of trying to reconcile at this current time so that it's fully transparent, so that people understand the challenges that we're working through, and so that it then can be finally corrected whenever that time may be. Whether that is in three months, three weeks, three years, I don't know.

But I would clearly put that out at the beginning in the form of a management letter would be my recommendation.

Name was next. I was waiting for proof

I it. I don't I I appreciate the input. I'm just looking at it trying

to figure it out.

So I'm

What mister Ramirez went to what? He's pondering.

Yeah. I just so just so we can I can be we can be clear here? So there's no there's no way to cut personnel?

No. There's no way to cut firefighters. Firefighters.

Has it has has it been evaluated what the fallout would be if we rescinded on the to the turn back on the taper grant? Is is that a way to

From my

understanding, I do have a couple emails on it, we would be responsible for paying back what they've given us so far.

Which is a 106 sorry. Through the

chair. K.

Which is a $162,000. In that neighborhood. Yes. So so is that, like, set in stone, like, we are not cutting from the fire department?

We can't cut from the fire department. The staff is out of the grant. It says specifically you need to maintain the levels when the grant was applied for that would middle borrower applied for a grant for six. Right. They give you six. Okay. Now we are at a certain number, head count. And then we hired more. And it specifically says, even if you go beyond the hiring of the grant people, you still need to maintain the staffing levels.

So so I think my question so this is what my question is. Like, if we cut, then we re return the payment, the 162 k, which I understand. We're in a deficit, so that's even more money going out. So I get that aspect of it. But, you know, the other thing too is, like, my my thing is not only is it a matter of fairness, but now, you know, from a public safety sphere, you've got one of your public safety departments that is seriously hamstrung while the other one's got no impact at all.

I would say there's no impact on firefighter staffing, potentially.

Alright. So that's, like, there's not gonna be any cuts at the fire.

I didn't say that.

Okay. Alright.

Listen. Yes.

Yeah. Just one more thing I wanted to point out because I I didn't go back for for far enough. But in fiscal year twenty three, their actual was 2,300,000.

So we're at Budget? Budget. Fiscal year is

that? Fiscal year '23 actual as of 01/31/2023, total was 2,300,000.

What So I I would comment to that would be their requested

Get the requested.

Demonstrated fiscal year twenty seven proposal is 5.994497. Yep. With the people documented in budget. I don't think that's an accurate number.

I think it was at it was a midpoint. But, yeah, their their recommended budget for fiscal year twenty three was 4.2. So, yeah, we're talking the 33%.

Oh, I'm just saying it the $5.09 for '20 7?

Yep. It's gotta change.

It doesn't work. Take away look at the salaries of firefighters. 2.673 Is this the headcount's wrong. If we don't have grant money, and we've been paying people for at a minimum, we'd be paying three people for over a year. And I and how I get to three is there's three in the academy now, and there's six ahead of that those three on the grant.

So somehow, the three that are in the academy now, we found funds for. But February '25, there was 38 people. There's only thirty five three on the twenty seventh proposal. So still, how are we paying three people? Right now. I don't I don't it doesn't so that number is wrong. Mhmm. It's just flat out wrong. Mhmm. It's not 5,900,000. If we're not getting the grant money, how are we paying these

people? Exactly. Is there any other comments on the fire department budget? Is my question to you would be is is interim chief Fontaine, is he gonna he's gonna give us a revised budget total?

I will. Perfect.

Okay. And when do you anticipate that? Just so

It's what I'm doing right now. I was just looking for direction on how to accurately portray the people. Yep. And I guess I'm just gonna put the people down and put a line for their pay and just assume the federal government will give us some money someday. I don't know how we could do it. So we're kinda in a catch 22. We can't make a cut because we don't have the money we don't have the money to pay them, but we can't make a cut because then we won't get the money to pay them.

It it's we're we're damned if

we do. We're damned if we don't.

But we're not getting it anyway from the sound of it. I mean, I've only got a 100% to

get know why. And here's it all goes back. I don't know why we are not getting the money. Is it because it's FEMA and they're you know, there was a shutdown? Is it because the town hasn't fulfilled its obligation in reporting to the SAFR grant? Those there's two possibilities. I don't know.

Maybe because don't oh, sorry. Through the yeah.

Go

ahead. Yeah. So in in terms of head count through the chair vice chair to to Joe, The current chief should be able to

No. I've corroborate I am not I am not gonna place anything on the interim Do know him? He's he's not up to speed on any of this. Okay. So I mean, we've we've talked. Talked. I mean, he's provided me with some

of these documents. Does does she know people and where they are in the so how many people he's responsible for?

Yes. He knows she knows who he has.

So he's got he's got that that number Mhmm. To compare against the budget book numbers and whatever other numbers.

He's I

don't think he's probably even looked at the budget book. He just does the payroll. So so it's like okay.

So he can do it independently of the budget book.

He can corroborate for me the information that I ask him that I need when we we talk. We I need okay. I understand what I see in the budget book. I can count to thirty four five. And then I have a list over here, and it's a lot longer than what's in the budget book. My initial conversation was how how why are there so many people on the roster, on the payroll, but not listed in in the in the book? How are you gonna how do we handle that for fiscal year twenty seven? You have more people than you're showing in your proposed budget, not him. Again, okay. I talked to the budget director.

Okay. Tell me about the SABR grant. How much money have we actually gotten? $162.03, or whatever the number was. Just looking at we have seven six people enrolled in that program. We're short somewhere. I can tell you Yeah. The '27 proposed budget is not right.

Yeah. I and I I think that's clear. I just was wondering if he could give a headcount that could help us corroborate or kind of understand where the kind of the break

or or

help help

you with.

He's good. He's a good resource, but I I am not I am not laying this at his feet. Absolutely not. He he he came in to run a department, oversee it, and be a leader. His he will be expected to participate in the future, but he's getting up to speed on just running the department

Yep.

And being a presence. This we'll get to this, but we don't have enough time. He he needs to do what he needs to do. This is I'll take care of this. I I just but, again, looking at what we gotta do. I can I I just frustrating? The

the the sheet you have there, Joe, is it that's from our payroll department?

This is a department roster. Yep. That needs it's yes. It's public record now, but I need to redact this people's phone number are. This is the payroll.

This is week warrant. This is the payroll. Yep.

Payroll must have names that can

It does have names.

Okay.

But, again, it's actual checks being given to employees as opposed to this number for next year is screw skewed. Skewed. It is. It's right. It is.

You're right the first time.

So I again, this is this is this is in your wheelhouse. This is a finance committee. This is what we talked about the last couple of weeks. You guys look at the budgets. This is what this is what you guys need to address. But I think it's important to understand that people know that that $300,000 is not the safer rent. That was layered into the fire department budget to offset

the

the financial risk requirement that you're gonna have to pay when the grant runs out. And that money is not going into the budget. I am confident it's not a personnel issue. It's not a potential layoff. I'm telling you now, it's a cut. And you'll have to face that financial issue when the grant runs out. You guys are still on the finance committee. Good luck.

Uh-huh. So structural deficit. A future one.

Yep. Yes. Mhmm.

Gotta ask a question. You had mentioned earlier about an administrative captain.

Yes.

Is that I'm assuming that is different from the administrative assistant to the fire chief.

The administrative assistant is a civilian, does helps payroll, counts payable, does the administrative part of the fire department.

So now it begs the question, what's the administrative captain do?

Sir, inspection services, training. This second man goes out and does all the Okay. Non firefighting things that the fire department's required to

do under law. So it's basically like a deputy chief?

He he I I don't know.

Functions as one. He's not one, but he kinda Correct.

He's an officer. You know, obviously, he has the authority to go out and represent the town, fire inspections, all those different things that the 500 required to do, he does that.

Okay. Can I

just ask

you a question

before you No? I'm fine.

So in the diagram of the positions, we have five captains. Is that one of those five? Yes. It has you just There's

four groups. Each group has a captain and a lieutenant, then the extra captain is the administrator.

The one you

just spoke with. Yes. Okay.

So it's included. It's just Yep. Yes. Spelled out. Yep. And and I'll I'll so the number that you have that we pay, is the number over equate to the number of safer

So, again, this is a a thing. So when I talked to the budget director last week, their overtime expenditures are double of what the overtime allotment is right now for '26, but yet they might not go over their budget. So I I don't know how this is working when we're paying people that, again, we don't have money to pay for. It's

But then I'm sorry. Mom, it's me. So the number that is not is do the is there seven that you can't account for?

Six. Six. Possibly three minimum, possibly six.

And would that equate to the number that were applied for in the grant then?

Six is on the grant. Yes.

Right. So that number of the

Correct. But we haven't gotten the received the full financial fulfillment of the grant since they've started. We've only received a very tiny portion for six people. Okay. So, again but yet the the fight upon the budget overtime is doubled, but their overall bottom line number is is close coming up to the into the fourth quarter.

So can I just continue? So as we go through each budget and you had asked us to look at the expenses, the personnel piece you're struggling with, we all are now, but there there's not a lot that we can go into the supplies and the expenditures of for supplies other than personnel and make recommendations Right. $300,000. Right.

Any any any amount of money you can save on that side, well, hopefully, maybe we can save a parcel.

Right. But I guess my point is for us to dwell on the x number plus the six is you're you're dealing with

that. Yes.

For us to keep going around on this

So my my point when I mentioned that to you, this is something that I would when I talked about collaborative effort, you know, standing shoulder to shoulder when it comes time to present the budget. You know, being able to say this has been discussed, and we know that the $300 contrary to popular belief is not a safer grant. I need I need that unity. I well, I'll

speak for myself, but I hope that we can Right. Place it.

Finance committee be able to this is this is in your wheelhouse. This is your this is your sole responsibility, this type of an issue, looking at head counts and figuring out the bottom line numbers and looking at expenditures line by line.

And that's that that has been the focus.

I agree. And I appreciate it. Now I'm just saying, hey. You got any ideas on how to demonstrate this mess?

So If I continue. Yep. I think mister Bareller, he didn't say it this way. He's just saying the story what it is. Yeah. It just you know, it's the only way to explain it, and people are gonna have to

Listening to it, as you know, as an educator, some people learn and absorb through hearing versus seeing versus doing. A lot of people are going to want to look at a piece of paper and want it to have it themselves. Mathed those are the people I want to make sure that they're not passed over and just give a verbal explanation of it. I want it documented. So if anyone ever questions it, we can go back and say, nope. We discussed it then. Here's the document. Not have someone question in the future like, this doesn't work. I think it's important that, again, you guys being being able to look at the numbers and examine it, and you give the thumbs up too. Yeah.

We agree. We're in agreement. That's what I I think the town wants to hear. We're in agreement.

Well, without asking, I think we're learning to agree. Mhmm. Mister Phillips.

Through the chair. So I don't know. I'm still confused on this why they can't be like, I get because we we accepted the safer grant. But in the interest of fairness, in the interest of not hamstringing other departments, I think that that has to be on the table as a possibility. And especially considering that we've only received a 162 k I mean, we're talking $3,300,000 roughly.

Right? Again, not to be callous about it or cavalier about it. Like, what the hell is another 162 k at this point if it's gonna save us long term? Because much like BP, the $800,000 is getting kicked the can's getting kicked down the road. This is getting kicked the can's getting kicked down the road as well.

I I will I will say this. I don't know. I'm tasked with balancing the budget. I wanna stay in my lane. I don't wanna exceed my authority. I don't think I'm the person that makes that decision unilaterally by myself in a silo to not fund a a grant. That's a town wide impact. People are passionate about it. There's been a lot of tragedy in this community. I understand the, you know, the need.

We're such a big community. We need to be able to, you know, cut down response times. I get it that I respectfully offer that. I'm not making that decision. That's a select board decision. That's, you know, a vote, a hearing. I don't know. It it that's not one per one person cannot make that call.

Alright. And I can I can appreciate that too? I I appreciate that.

And I have to be honest with you, I have no feelings either way. I would I would understand if there was, you know, a call to do that. I also understand that, nope. This is this is what we need to do. I think if we can get this squared away and we can demonstrate an accurate assessment of this department and show exactly who works there, how much is spent.

After a couple of years, you realize possibly the benefit to the grant. And then at some point in the future, that's a decision that could be made. You say kick it down the road. That'd be something I think, you know, maybe there'll be different financial situation. I don't wanna act prematurely and have a knee jerk reaction just because, you know, this is frustrating.

It is frustrating. And I know especially frustrating to people who are losing their livelihood that this I I go through and the the looking at processing the idea of having to lay off somebody and then get into this and recognizing gross mismanagement in my opinion and not not just I gotta look at it through the numbers, not looking at it emotionally. It's difficult.

Well and I think, you know, I mean, the other issue too, there's a glaring issue with overtime. I mean, when you when you expend almost three times what was budgeted, not not even double.

Don't spend an overtime comparable to some cities around us. City fire departments. Like, we're not a city. We're not a fire department that runs an ambulance. I could justify it if we had that extra responsibility.

Well, even even They don't

have they don't run an ambulance.

Bridgewater has an ambulance Yep. And they're over times

Less. Less. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mansfield, they're over times less. Both towns have a big population than we do.

Well, and that and that lines up with with increased manpower. It should be reflected. There should be an inverse relationship with the owner of way

in a in in that in that moment where, okay, the manpower hadn't arrived on scene quite yet, 2025. That's when the overtime was at the highest. Looking at the the higher list. For 2025 would be July through July 25. One two, three, four, five, six, seven people have been hired at that time.

There's three more in the academy now, but I'm just looking for that fiscal year. I don't know how many retired in that time. So it could be a wash, a head head for head, one retire, new hire. I'm not sure. So the buildup to that staffing level, I know they weren't that low, but that buildup and being able to staff the two fire departments that they staff, that would have to be considered.

So maybe we're in caught right in the perfect time when we're looking back and seeing the expenditures, but now the people are coming on board, and that overtime should dip. Except I checked, and the overtime's doubled right now. So I I don't I it has to it has to you can't have one in you can't have both. You have to

have one or the other. Mhmm.

Well, and to that point, like so I believe you had said earlier in this meeting that currently, for FY '26, which for those who don't know, we're still in flight for fiscal year '26. It ends on June 30. We're already at $700,000.

Double $3.15, and I believe I was told it was 7, and that was from the budget director.

And so now if you take and you divide that by nine, it's still roughly about two month two and a half months, three months left before the fiscal year ends. It's north of a $180,000. If because if you break it down, you divide it by well, currently, it's about $75,000 a month in overtime that we're spending. So

now if

you just apply that simple math, you you we're looking, again, well into eight over 800,000.

Over time. Hope, you know, in the conversation I had with the interim chief, that was one of my, you know, directives is to minimize the overtime because it was so so Egregious? I don't know. There's many words you can describe used to describe it, but it was it's unsustainable Yep. To put it politely.

Through the chair, I'm sorry, but I absolutely have to know why the overtime is so out

of whack.

This makes no sense. It begs the question, why are you budgeting 315. 15 $316,000 for overtime, and you're blowing that up? Just blowing passive. Not we're not talking about, like, you know, 5%, 10% over. I mean, we're talking huge overage. Like, I I've got like, I'm I'm at a loss of words, which is really saying something for me. Like, I'm at a loss of words on this. Like, this is this is gross. So

while you're at a loss, you had your hand up?

If I did, I forgot. Well,

you remember.

I had

my hand up. So I presented this back when I was the chair. I have the statistics here in my hand. The fire department overtime pay, the budget versus actual from fiscal years twenty to twenty four.

And I'll just call out two years.

Fiscal year '23, the overtime budget for the fire department was $250,000. The actual was $310.09 27. In fiscal year twenty four, to to Matt's point, they budgeted $441,442, and they actually came in slightly under that, believe it or not, at $426.02 24. But to Matt's point, think I just heard him say they budgeted this year for 315, which is kinda wild because in 2024, they spent $4.26. And I ran a calibration on this and just so people that are watching can understand.

A calibration is something that you use to interpret growth over a period of time. And so the calibration that I ran for the budget to actual overtime in the fire department from fiscal year twenty twenty, to fiscal year twenty twenty four, the calibration for overtime increased a 151.89%. I don't know in any world where that could not have been addressed, like, when I brought this to people's attention a while ago. And it's not to belabor that point, but it's just to to be real with this this the number of what was purported to be budgeted at fiscal year twenty three amounts when in fiscal year twenty four, they topped that by a 130,000. And now it's basically double that.

So that's just to put a reference point on things.

And just very quickly too, to just reiterate, this current fiscal year, the budgeted amount for overtime was $316,000. The projected or the FY '27 budget, $316,000. Like, what is going on? Like, there's no

So it is either one or two things. It either is what it is that or the budget book is, like, misleading Mhmm. For another reason other than not having the right people in the right budget number on in the book. I mean, I I thought it might have been a typo because it's so high, but it's not.

Well, there's been a lot of typos. And one thing I will ask, I've asked it previously, Former town manager, Jay Bregal, part of his concession to be let out of his contract early, he was supposed to offer or or perform 10 of pro bono work per week. Has has this question been asked? I mean, I'm there's a plethora of questions regarding this budget, obviously. But just out of curiosity, like, well, where where do we stand on that ten hours per week?

Has that been, like, honored? And if so, has this has this even come up, like, the fire department budget?

Do you remember the date that I first initially reported that we've had a problem

that Monday?

I don't remember the exact date off the top

of my head, but it was while ago. Week in February?

Yeah. Was, like, early March, I think. Very early March.

It was the Friday before that Monday. That was the last time I talked to him.

Okay.

On the phone. And then I texted him that following Wednesday, and that's the last time

I communicated with him. The Monday, March 16. Interesting.

Alright. Guess that answers that question. Thank you.

Are there any other questions to the town manager on anything or still this topic?

I guess my are we are we going further than the buyer department? Or is there No. That's big one.

But I think, again, being able to I don't know how the board plans to move forward. What, you know, we talked about last week and being able to consult and talk about it and bring me some feedback on numbers like this is what we're talking about. Again, I'm open to it, but I prefer to the chair, what would you prefer to do? Well,

this topic would have come up as department two two o. We only get to about one fifty one last night. The hope was that we could continue going through each budget, finding areas that we could apply expenditures. We have some advice. We had some questions that came up already that we need I need to forward to you.

It just occurred last night that came up. I was hoping that could be the process. We we did schedule four meetings, so I suppose if tonight stays on the fire department, we still have two other nights to go through the rest of the budget if there's any more to tell about the fire and I I understand there's a lot of questions. So I will if the committee, without official vote, this committee would rather just stay focused on the fire department, then we'll have to come back to going through one budget at a time like we did last night. Or we could take what he has given to us and try to, I don't know, create more questions.

And then we get to that department, ask him to come in and because we we generated more questions. Mister Barrel?

My thought is there's a lot to unpack, and I just think it would be a little bit jumping the gun if we move forward before we get more because it is aside from the schools, which we're really not working with. It's, like, one of the largest departments as we all know in the town. And I think if we don't get it right and we move on to other things, we don't we just wanna sew it all up before we move on. That's just my 2¢.

Say it again. Yeah. Is this simply what you wanna do is stay with the fight upon it?

That would be my goal.

And we're all willing to come next the the two days next week to we need to go through the other budgets.

Yeah. We have

to get through the other budgets. Yeah. As important as this is, every other department is just as important.

Yeah.

Yeah. And can I just add one thing to it? I know I didn't make it a motion, but I made a recommendation. Do you guys feel like you can get the payroll and the head count lists, or should I make it a motion and ask your thoughts on it?

Joe, I I don't need a motion. I'm not sure how Joe, you have a source. If you could let us know the because it sounds like you've got a source from payroll. You've

got

a if we wanna do some corroboration Right. Payroll. Right?

Yeah.

Can get Let's be. As a liaison to different departments, headcount from the department, but Joe's got some other kind of checkpoints, if you will.

Are you asking me?

No. I'm not asking you to. I'm just asking if there's so many we could go to to

Again, I think as elected officials in the town, you should have access to that why why we ask you? It should be at your fingertips. Yep. This is what the people elected you for.

Yeah. No. I don't I don't know who the person is. I'm I'm

saying you should have unfettered access. You know, the finance committee, I I worked in other towns. I don't know other towns where they don't have the finance committee have the the you need the documents to do your work. Yeah.

And I'm not asking that we need permission. I'm I'm asking who's the person you got your information from so I can contact that person as well?

What what what the

Well, you've got a number

of yeah.

You've got payroll

I would I would call Sue Nickerson in the Okay. The budget and finance director.

I'd like to go John, would your question to Alan meet the expectation that he was asking about?

Yeah. I think so.

I think what

Alan's trying to do is I just wanna make sure that he is prepared to get list a and list b just like interim Perkins has done. And then same thing for Nate. I don't have them because I have just legal, so it's not a headcount issue. What do mean? As a lay my liaison is just legal department. There's an Okay.

Yeah. I just wanna make sure the focus was on what we we were expanding.

I mean, if I may, three Yes. Specifically. Don't you know, animal control has two people. Like, I we don't think we need any date. I for the biggest apartment, fire, police, DBW, obviously. I mean, I think we all know who who's who in town. Yeah. So I wouldn't I wouldn't overextend you if yourselves trying to get the information. But the the money part, the payroll part, yeah, you should have adequate access to it.

I'm struggling, but I should Thank you. I'll speak up later. Go ahead.

Really quickly. Munis. So it's a conversation for a later date, but I just wanna put it on your radar screen because it would be helpful to what interim manager Perkins just mentioned about access, and we've talked about this as a long standing issue. If we could get through you, a way to get read only access to Munis and maybe someone that can walk people through the committee through it, that would be helpful because there is supposed to be, to Aaron Perkins' point, a self-service computer. Say, for instance, down in IT where people go in and they log in on their email accounts, so you probably just have seen it.

There should be a computer that has a license, whether it's in the IT department or whether it's sitting physically in the finance and accounting department department, where we can literally go and just be

like, okay. Hey.

I wanna look up this. I wanna look up that. Open finance is great for the average consumer slash taxpayer, but it doesn't show you the granularity detail that we need to see as finance committee members. It it's very myopic in its view. We need access to Munis. So I would just ask if maybe we can prioritize that and maybe get a a class on it. At some point, we can know what buttons to push.

After we are done with the town manager and before we adjourn, I have an item I'd like to put into the agenda next meeting, which will lead to your point. As a finance committee member for a number of years now, they've always questioned well, back up. When you look at what other finance committees are able to do and are doing in the state, the access to the information is never questioned. And we've been in a in a mode that the access to the information has become very difficult to

That's become obvious to me.

In a month and a half, I've been here.

The document you asked for, it's no offense, ridiculous that you're asking me for them.

And I think we'll find that we can move forward. It may not happen overnight, but I think we can move forward in a way that the import the important function that the finance committee has has got to be able to do it by getting the information without struggling and getting it.

Correct. So I think with you on that

going in your direction, but I I think I have a I have a suggestion, which I've been thinking about on how to go about so people understand what we're trying to do. So go back to what we're talking about. So we're looking for the liaison to get as much information on the budget on the payroll that we can't. Mhmm. And your suggestion, Sue Nickerson?

Yes. Yes.

Yes. And and just to

be clear, we're we're not doing this outside of the context of all your impact bargaining. So this is just a matter

of You're not looking at the people. You're looking at budgets. Total total heads. Look at make sure you're on the other side of book too.

Yep. The expenditure.

Yep. And revenue and expenditure. Both sides. Right. It's your job.

Nate? Yep. Two things. On the on your operating budget, on the employee fringe ben benefits, you have, you know, showing basically $637,000 discrepancy. Do you know what attributed

That is the extra money. So we are putting $650,000 towards twenty twenty six's health insurance contribution. The 2027 number was not calculated with a percentage increase attributed to the extra $6.50 that we just put on it this year, and that was the extra health insurance contribution we're putting on next year of June and change. Yep. Okay. That was PowerPoint number three.

Yeah. That was really the Topical. That was the biggest the big one that I saw on your.

That's it's it it that is captured in that line.

K. K. I think that's all I got.

Paul, may I ask you Sure. Or just because I know you're gonna leave a couple of comments as a parent. Two things. Number one, I noticed on John and Matt's and Matt recently had a Facebook post book budget on their page. And I noticed that somebody had commented inside something that said that in the fire department, more senior officials will take overtime from junior officials.

Whether that's be there's something to that effect. And I don't they don't, like, steal it, but they'll say, oh, I'll take it instead. And I'm only bringing this up as a possible investigation as to why it's inflated Because if those if someone was doing that, they would obviously be paying at a higher rate.

I have no knowledge of that. I do not know how they in the police contract, all overtime would be distributed in a fair and equitable manner. And it's not a seniority based option to take overtime. It's not because you've seen it. It's fair and equitable is the Yeah. CBA language. I haven't looked, but if it's not that in the fire department, shame on them for doing it that way. But it should be regulated through their CBA.

Okay.

And I I don't know how they do it, but I would be shocked if they did it that way.

I'm not well, I'm not I'm not saying necessarily nefariously. And for all I know, the person who commented on it is a firefighter 15 towns over and doesn't actually know what we do here. So I'm not gonna

I I'm not on social media, so I don't and I don't trust this what it says in social media.

So But

the secondary aspect I was wondering is we sadly, we have a lot of fires, and some of them are dangerous, and they are deadly. And it that seems to be a bit of a a scary trend.

Mhmm.

But could some of that over time be sort of people showing up to to fight the fire Yes. Even if they're not on

percent. But as I look at the city of New Bedford, the town of Plymouth, the town of Bridgewater, the town of Mansfield, I didn't notice any issues that would launch Middleborough to the stratosphere that it's in for overtime.

Yeah. I'm just wondering if, you know, somebody's like, oh, yeah. File in for overtime even though you're not on shift, and you just got off at twelve or a three day. And it's like, in actuality, they're not on shift. If you choose to be there, do you get paid for it still? I don't know if the bargaining agreement says something about that, and those are just things I'm thinking of as a resident.

They do get over time for responding to emergencies on callback. I do know that. And I'm a 100%. Like Yeah. Absolutely.

Absolutely. Right. Like, when it comes to that, we

want as many answers coming to get. Something, some huge tragedy, some months long rescue that, you know, over

the course $20,000. Yeah.

I I didn't notice anything.

So I'm just wondering, you know, things like that might add up. And then

They do add a up. Management thing. Add up in all these other towns as well and cities. I guess it's all about, you know, what you I I I it's the numbers too. I thought it was a typo. That's how shocking the number was too. Yeah. Shocking. And

that's all I have for

you. Thank you. But,

no, I didn't And thank you, Bob. I don't know how to do it.

Mister Phillips?

Not to belabor this point, but since we're still talking about the fire department, I just happen to go back. This is the 2026 budget book. And right at the beginning on page seven, if these numbers are accurate, page numbers. To the question about, like, how these people are being paid because it's not reflected in the budget, it shows twenty twenty four grant awards. FEMA assistance to firefighters grant program, AFG, 42,000.

FEMA assistance to firefighters grant program, AFG, $69,960. FEMA assistance to firefighters grant program, AFG, $180,268. FEMA assistance to firefighters grant program, AFG, $681,768. FEMA staffing for adequate fire and emergency response grants, SAFR, $2,019,003.30 dollars. And then lastly, FEMA fire prevention and safety grant program, $226,088. That last one, I believe, probably had something to do with the smoke detectors Yep. That program. But

Guys, when I checked with the budget director, I asked her specifically, why aren't the safer grant people depicted in the budget book? Because it means paid by the grant. Okay. How much have we gotten from the SAFR grant? $1.62, $1.63. That's all the information I can report to you. And that the budget, in my opinion, is misleading.

And there's four other grants. Like, I don't know where that money went, if it's already been expended, if that's too far on the rearview, but I just felt it was worth identifying because I'm with you, like, confused how the math is mapping.

It may be grant money. But, again, that should be depicted in

It's gotta be identified.

Like Identified Yeah. Described. It's we don't have 26 firefighters.

Mhmm. We have more.

Right. The 27.

Anyone else with the town manager being here other than the fire that Like, they asked me for a release.

I told you it's 85.

I appreciate

it, though. Yes. Yeah.

Thank you

very much. I would, through the chair, just like to say to and I'm not gonna call you interim town manager