Town Manager Presents Final STM Warrant to BOS
At their meeting on Monday, September 26, the Town Manager presented the Final Warrant for the Fall Special Town Meeting, scheduled for Monday, October 24 at 7:00 p.m., to the Board. Instead of the thirteen articles in the draft Warrant presented on September 12, the final Warrant was slimmed down to only eleven separate articles. Town Manager Justin Sultzbach explained each one.
Final Special Town Meeting Warrant
https://www.townofwinchendon.com/sites/g/files/vyhlif8401/f/news/special_town_meeting_warrant_10.24.22.pdf (PDF)
Proposed Town Charter Amendments
https://www.townofwinchendon.com/sites/g/files/vyhlif8401/f/news/proposed_amended_charter_changes_oct_2022_0.pdf (PDF)
Article 1 concerns the Finance Committee's report on the town's financial status, focusing on the amount in Free Cash and how the expenditures in the following articles will impact that.
"We're looking at a situation where Free Cash flow is going to range from about $100,000 to $1.8 million and that's a big swing," Mr. Sultzbach said. He explained that Free Cash has not been certified yet, although it will be certified by Town Meeting. There are some substantial outstanding amounts the town is still waiting for on both the town and school sides of the budget, approximately $1.2 million in outstanding grants.
"We need to get a draw down on those grants before we go to certify Free Cash. Otherwise, it looks like an outstanding expense. So it artificially ties up Free Cash or what would be Free Cash in that amount," Mr. Sultzbach explained. "That money doesn't go away. We don't lose it. It just means it won't be available until next year when we go to certify Free Cash. So that was something that we want to review with the community."
Mr. Sultzbach said he'd been talking with the Capital Planning Committee about the best way to balance drawing from Free Cash with borrowing to cover the expenses in the Warrant. It's ended up being about half of each. "But the important takeaway is a lot of the Free Cash items we're looking to fund aren't frivolous items. In fact, a majority of them are stabilization accounts. We're looking to take that money and earmark it, put it away for a rainy day. It's not going anywhere. It's not leaving us needlessly exposed." The $1.2 million in the Warrant will leave the town about $100,000 shy of the goal of having 5 percent of general operating costs in reserved, certified Free Cash. "So from a fiscal perspective, we're in really good shape, and we're continuing to trend in that direction," he asserted.
Article 2 is the $100,000 request for streetlights on Central Street and in the new gateway park at Lake Street and Spring Street. This covers the remaining amount needed on top of grants from the state and the Robinson Broadhurst Foundation. The Capital Planning Committee voted 4-0 to approve this article. This would come from Free Cash.
Article 3 requests $145,000 for Phase 2 of the Beals Memorial Library upgrade. This amount has been reduced from the $215,000 in the draft Warrant because it was found that the $70,000 left over from Phase 1 could be applied to offset Phase 2 costs. Mr. Sultzbach stated that the Capital Planning Committee approved the expenditure 5-0 on the condition that it come from borrowing, over a five-year period, not from Free Cash.
In response to a question from Board Vice Chair Rick Ward, Mr. Sultzbach explained that "borrowing" is not the same as a debt exclusion and will not increase taxes at all. There is a line item in the town budget for debt service and that will be increased, taking available money from other lines in the budget, but will not impact taxes. Mr. Ward objected that he felt paying 4 percent interest on a loan is a waste of money when they could simply take the money out of Free Cash.
"If it doesn't affect the tax rate, you need to say that on the Warrant, because the people that are voting need to know if it's not going to affect their tax rate. That needs to be on the Warrant, not spoken in Town Meeting all of a sudden," Mr. Ward asserted.
Selectman Barbara Anderson said, "I think my criticism for myself and for others that I've heard of is they're tired of seeing the library project there every single Town Meeting, and it looks like we're just getting money and not doing anything."
Mr. Sultzbach put in, "As someone who a portion of my day is soaked up by this project every time I walk in the door, I would argue a lot is being done even though people don't necessarily see it. I do agree with your sentiment. This shouldn't have come back a third time. I think we dropped the ball on this one." He recapped that the initial project was approved based on estimates, and actual costs escalated rapidly due to COVID--"not using that as a crutch, just as a matter of reality." So more funds were requested, but by the time the next phase went out to bid, costs had risen even more.
He went on, "We're trying to move in a direction where we do a design, bid, build process, and that's your best bet, and that we as a community would fund projects that we have an interest in funding to pay for the design first. We can do the design, we can put it out to bid 30-60 days in advance of a special or an annual Town Meeting. And then we can go to the people on Town Meeting floor with a concrete number, and say this isn't what we think it's going to cost, this is what it's going to cost, period. And that's what we're looking to do moving forward."
Mr. Ward said that his objection was not to the cost per se but paying for it with borrowing and having to pay interest on a loan.
Article 4 requests increasing the budget line item for highway materials by $95,000 which will be covered by additional money from the state and used to make repairs on Pleasant Street, Island Road and a section at Pleasant and Summer Streets, before prices go up even more. The Board had no questions. This will come out of Free Cash.
Article 5 requests approval for a debt exclusion in the amount of $618,750 to cover designs for a proposed upgraded fire station. (A debt exclusion allows towns to raise taxes above the Proposition 2-1/2 limit, but only temporarily. Once the debt is paid off, the increase in the tax rate is rescinded. In an override, the increase is permanent. Like Prop 2-1/2 overrides, a debt exclusion must go to a ballot vote as well be being approved at Town Meeting by a two-thirds majority or greater.) Mr. Sultzbach stated that the debt exclusion will result in an "average" residential tax bill (on a home assessed at $242,405) going up by $33.94.
Ms. Anderson asked if voters could see what other debt exclusions are currently in effect, which will eventually be paid off and taken off the tax rates. Mr. Sultzbach said he will check.
Mr. Ward questioned the timeline, pointing out that it appeared that even if the article was approved, it would need to go to a ballot vote next spring before the architects could even start work. Town elections are held in May before Annual Town Meeting. Winchendon Fire Chief Tom Smith rose to basically affirm that, saying that it would take some six to eight months for designs to be completed, as these would be buildable plans, not just schematics. They would come to Fall Town Meeting in 2023 with the next step, approving construction. Mr. Ward wondered why they shouldn't just wait to bring this article to Town Meeting next May.
Selectman Amy Salter asked how they could be sure that the costs wouldn't have gone way up by the time the designs were done. Chief Smith explained that the architect would be creating plans based on specifications including financial costs. They've done a cost estimate with cost escalations built into the project. The architect would have to stay within those amounts in the design. Mr. Sultzbach added that the architectural firm "know definitively what we're looking for in terms of the floorplan and they know that that should not exceed eight and a half million [dollars] so they'll be designing something based on that."
Article 6 requests $9,560,000, via a 30-year borrowing plan, to replace the water main from Ashburnham to Winchendon.
Mr. Sultzbach explained that this amount is not what it appears. "So when we're bringing it to the town, we have to bring it in a full dollar value and get approval to borrow legally in the full dollar value. But that's not the amount that the people at Winchendon are going to be paying for this pipe. There is right off the bat that 19 percent forgiveness [of the cost by the state]. We're also setting up meetings with members of the state and federal government trying to identify different pots of money or resources. That could help defray some of this cost. Ultimately, its worst case scenario would be about a $350,000 annual debt payment. We're going to work to try to pull that down to about $250,000 Or maybe a little bit lower."
Asked why this article had no vote from the Capital Planning Committee, Mr. Sultzbach explained that it really fell under the Water Enterprise Fund capital expenditures. "The water plant has capital needs that we share with Ashburnham, so it's not going to be on our main capital plan. The wastewater plant, yeah, we do own it directly, but in the same way that we separate the water capital plan, we separate the wastewater capital plan. It could go before the Capital Planning Committee, it is an expense that realistically, it's not going to be paid entirely by the ratepayers. It is going to end up being a town expense in some capacity. I see no harm in maybe asking their opinion on [Town Meeting] floor."
Asked by Mr. Ward about "worst case scenario" cost, Mr. Sultzbach said they would be doing everything possible, including "value engineering" to pull down costs. Also, the amount cited is "a very conservative" (i.e. high) number, allowing for contingencies such as running into "way more ledge than you're realistically going to hit" during construction.
Selectman Amy Salter asked whether the funding costs would be covered by taxes or by the water ratepayers. Mr. Sultzbach responded that once costs were brought down as low as possible, "the question is going to have to be, will that be paid for by the ratepayers or will it be paid for as some type of blend? And that's not something that I care to stick my neck, my neck out on and offer a guess but I would imagine it would have to be some type of blended funding source."
Department of Public Works Director Brian Croteau rose to say, "The Massachusetts system for this loan is broken. What it gets us is a fixed interest rate. But what it doesn't do is give you a hard number or tell you exactly what you're getting for grants monies till you're approved. So without this approval in Town Meeting, it's pulled off from the state and it doesn't move forward on the project process. So it's kind of backwards if you ask me, they're supposed to change the process, but who knows how long that could take. So without a positive movement on this, it'll get pulled from the state and the additional funding that the state could potentially put into it, we won't get. We'd have to start from zero."
Resident Rick Lucier rose to argue that the town should use $366,000 in the budget from a past school override vote for this project or "a project like this."
Resident Tina Santos rose to state that the article should be clear on whether taxpayers or water ratepayers would be bearing the cost. "The water users are always getting hit with higher rates," she said. "And if that main water breaks, we have no water in Winchendon whatsoever. So that means this building, all our town buildings, our school buildings, and businesses down on Central Street and all around town. So not necessarily just because you do not have [town] water, you have a well, that does not mean it does not affect you. We have employees and or residents that work at Town Hall...we need to get away from water users versus well users. We're all a town and we all benefit no matter what events, school, town buildings, businesses, etc. We need to stop putting it on one set of people, our water users and sewer users, because it's a lot."
Articles 7, 8, 9 and 10 propose moving funds from Free Cash into various reserve accounts and elicited no questions or comments from the Board or residents.
Article 10 combined the two separate articles in the draft Warrant concerning the changes to the Town Charter. One amendment had been made and approved last year but had not gone to a ballot vote as required and had now expired. It need to be approved again and then go to ballot vote. The other amendment was made this year but held so that both amendments could be voted on at the same time. No costs are involved.
Selectman Danielle LaPointe raised a question about the change in requirements for recalling elected officials. The current Charter states that 15 percent of the number of voters who attended the most recent Annual Town Meeting are required to sign a recall petition. The amendment changes this to 15 percent of the total number of registered voters in town. Ms. LaPointe questioned whether this was making it much harder, perhaps too hard, for voters to recall an elected official.
There was a discussion about the amendment adding "town website" to the Town Hall bulletin board as a required location to post vacancies in town elected or appointed boards and committees. Board members argued that not everyone in town accesses either the town website or Town Hall. Ms. Anderson suggested the town Code Red auto-call system as a way of notifying residents.
With all articles gone through, Mr. Ward proposed amending article 3 (the library repairs) to be funded from Free Cash. The motion passed. The Board then voted unanimously to finalize the Fall Special Town Meeting Warrant as amended.
Winchendon P.D. Nabs Alleged Drug Dealer
On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 just after midnight, Winchendon Police responded to a report of a motor vehicle crashing into a mailbox and trash cans at a Spring Street address, then leaving the scene and heading toward downtown Winchendon. The reporting party provided a vehicle description and a New Hampshire plate number. Moments after it left the Spring Street location, Officer Joseph Champney stopped the vehicle.
During the vehicle stop, Officer Champney made several observations which gave him probable cause to search the vehicle for illegal drugs. The search yielded approximately 157 grams of suspected fentanyl packaged into 15 separate bags, and 86 grams of suspected crack cocaine packaged into three separate bags. A digital scale and a small amouht of cash were also found. The drugs "were packaged in a manner consistent with street level distribution," according to the Winchendon PD press release by Lt. Kevin Wolski.
The operator of the vehicle, Marshal Redfield, 26, of Keene NH, was arrested at the scene and charged with trafficking in more than 10 grams of fentanyl, trafficking in more than 36 grams of cocaine, possession with intent to distribute a class A drug, possession with intent to distribute a class B drug, negligent operation of a motor vehicle, leaving the scene of an accident with property damage and marked lanes violation. Mr. Redfield was held overnight on $25,000 cash bail and arraigned later that morning in Winchendon District Court.
Information gleaned during the arrest was passed on to Keene, NH Police Detectives. who later seized approximately 40 more grams of fentanyl from a Keene hotel room that Mr. Redfield had occupied.
197 grams of fentanyl is enough for a lethal dose, on average, for 98,500 people.
According to reports in the Keene Sentinel, Mr. Redfield has a very long history with the New Hampshire law enforcement and judicial system.
In June, 2008, when Mr. Redfield was 12, he was found guilty of possession and use of tobacco by a minor, received a deferred $100 fine and was required to attend Smokeless Saturday.
In January 2013, Mr. Redfield, then 17, was before the court on charges of theft from a building. The case continued for trial.
In September, 2015, Mr. Redfield pleaded guilty to carrying or selling weapons and illegal possession of alcohol. For the weapons plea, he was fined $1000 of which $800 was suspended on condition of two years of good behavior; for the alcohol plea, he was fined $372 to be paid through 37 hours of community service.
Mr. Redfield was arrested and charged with selling heroin to a Keene police officer in a sting operation in September 2017. He was then listed as homeless. in January 2018 Mr. Redfield was indicted on charges of sale of fentanyl, accomplice to sale of cocaine and accomplice or principal to sale of fentanyl.
In August, 2018, Mr. Redfield was given multiple concurrent sentences on both felony and misdemeanor charges, including robbery, burglary, resisting arrest, obstructing the report of a crime, criminal trespass, criminal mischief, check forging, selling fentanyl and receiving stolen property. The longest sentences imposed were three to six years in New Hampshire State Prison (with 304 days credited for time served in Cheshire County Jail while awaiting resolution of his case) and two to four years in state prison with 304 days credited for time served. He was ordered to pay multiple fines, penalties and restitution, including $40 in restitution to the Keene Police Department and $56 in restitution to New Hampshire State Police Sgt. William DiLegge for one of the resisting arrest charges. Some of the fines were suspended.
In every case noted, Mr. Redfield pleaded guilty to charges.
