Voters at Town Meeting check the myriad of handouts distributed at Monday's Town Meeting.

Hanson recently changed from an executive secretary system to a town administrator model of government, a switch made official on March 17 of 2006 when a special act of the state legislature was signed into law.  One of the changes of the act is that it gives Town Administrator Michael Finglas more authority over the budget.  This year was the first year the budget was prepared under the new system.  Voters at Town Meeting got to see both Finglas’s recommendations and the figures recommended by the town’s Finance Committee.

The confusion started before Town Moderator Charles Mann had even gaveled the meeting officially open.  At the last Board of Selectmen meeting, Chairman James Egan said the numbers read at Town Meeting would be the town administrator’s figures.  However, at Town Meeting itself, Mann read the recommendations from the Finance Committee.  If the selectmen wanted to make a change, they had to ask that the budget line be held and propose an amendment.

The main difference between Finglas’s budget and that of the Finance Committee was over department heads’ salaries.  Finglas had conducted an evaluation process and given the department heads raises up to 3 percent.  The Finance Committee, however, had knocked all raises down to 2 1/2 percent.

Because of the differences in the two budgets, when Mann listed off the individual line items in the budget for approval, there were 53 “hold” calls, meaning that people wanted to debate the item.

Mann did not want the town to debate each item individually.

“Rather than debating each line, it’s the feeling of the chair that we should have the town administrator give his reasons for the 3 percent, the Finance Committee give their reasons for 2 1/2, then I will ask for one vote,” he said.

Finglas said that the 3 percent increases for department heads came about as a result of performance evaluations he conducted, part of his new duties as a town administrator.

“It looks like everybody just got 3 percent with no thought and that’s not what happened,” he said.  “I know how hard they work … it’s kind of a slap to them.”

Finglas also pointed out that in a total budget of $14 million, the difference between a 3 percent raise and a 2 1/2 percent raise for all the discussed employees is only $4,294.

Finance Committee Chairman Sean Kealy defended his board’s position.

“We brought everybody down proportionally so that the evaluation process was not diminished,” he said.

Although Kealy said he did not want to “micro manage” the town administrator, he cautioned that the voters at Town Meeting have the final say.

“His decisions are subject to appropriation. Appropriation is made by you. This Town Meeting is the check and balance on the Town Administrator’s power, and I would strongly caution this Town Meeting against giving that up,” Kealy added.

Kealy also cautioned against the voters approving requests that would drain the town’s stabilization fund.  As bad as this year seems, next year is projected to be worse, he said.

“The less we take out of stabilization this year, they better we are going forward.”

Town Meeting eventually voted to approve the salaries for department heads at the 3 percent increase.  After that motion passed, Finglas suggested the body proceed with the Finance Committee’s numbers for the rest of the held items.

Not all the controversial items in the budget were due to the differences in proposed raises. Other items of interest were:

• Recreation Commission Vice Chairman Joe Baker questioned why a proposed $7,000 expense line for lifeguards at Camp Kiwanee was not in the budget packet.  After some discussion, it appeared through a mistake in the proposal process the line was left out, and the only line that appeared in the handout was line 91, titled “Recreation Wages,” which represented the Kiwanee caretaker’s salary. 

Baker said the money was a necessity for running the beach at the camp.

“If we don’t get the extra $7,000 we have to understand we’ll have to shut down the beach early, but if we don’t get $3,000 up front, we might not be able to open it,” he said.

Baker was told by Town Moderator Charles Mann that now that the mistake was made, there was no mechanism to add a line item to the budget on Town Meeting floor.

This prompted an angry response from Baker and several other citizens.

“We thought this was all taken care of,” he said.  “The town should have a right to vote to allocate money if they want to support the recreation department.”

Someone on the floor made a motion to increase line 91 by $7,000.  Mann allowed the vote, which passed, but cautioned voters that the move might be ruled illegal by the Attorney General.

• The line item for maintenance for the new police station.  Selectman Jim Armstrong moved that Town Meeting consider Finglas’s proposed amount of $22,230 rather than the Finance Committee amount of $16,000.

Armstrong pointed out the town’s taxpayers just spent $4 million to build the station.

“I get very frustrated when you start cutting budgets out of a building you just spent money on,” he said. “I think it’s being pennywise and pound foolish.

Kealy pointed out the Finance Committee’s number wasn’t a cut, just less of an increase than the town administrator’s figure.

“We recognized the need to have more maintenance in that building,” he said.  “But these are very difficult times, there is very little discretionary funding available.”

Selectmen Chairman James Egan agreed with Armstrong.

“Often times, when a building is not maintained appropriately, it shows up a couple years down the road as a capital project,” he said.  “In terms of long-range planning it shows no intelligence whatsoever.”

Town Meeting eventually voted for the higher figure.

• There was also some question about why the increases proposed were all for non-unionized employees.  Officials said that all union contracts currently under negotiation had to be level funded by law.

“By law, we can’t change the lines within the budget that are subject to negotiation,” said Kealy.  “They have to be level funded until the contract is in place.”

The issue of funding contracts will be taken up in the fall at October special Town Meeting.