SUTTON BUDGET COMMITTEE MINUTES   1-3-22

 

The chair, Robert DeFelice, opened the meeting @ 6:00 PM.  Present were John Mock, Gail Guertin, Samantha Gordon, Mark Peterson, Pete  Thompson and Dane Headley.  Also in attendance was Diego Solimine and Chuck Nelson of the Solid Waste Department.

 

The chair adjusted the agenda and the committee opened with a discussion of the Solid Waste proposed budget.  The highlights of that budget and process are outlined below:

  1. Proposed computer for Solid Waste? Currently cell phones are being used as a resource of this type. The cell phones are personal and should not be used for town business.  TDS would charge $80 a month for computer use w/internet and modem from  the solid waste budget (item 341 telephone).  The purchase of the computer would be from the executive department budget (item 391 Computer)
  2. 101 Wages Budgeted 2021 $79,014   $63,000 2022  reflects the reduction of personnel and allowance for a 3rd  part time person.
  3. 705 Repairs There were two items (a) Over head door replacement funds are allocated from the CR 989 Municipal Building Fund (b) replacement of the compactor piston $5,000 and the concern that a new or lightly used compactor may have to be purchased.  If such a capital item need be purchased than it would be under CR 983 and require a town meeting for approval.
  4. 804 Hazardous Waste – Budget 2021  $1,300  2022  $1,800  The is a result of the change from taking such materials to Henniker and now taking them to Warner.  Warner is charging more.
  5. 805 Cardboard/Plastic – Budget 2021  $8,500  2022  6,000  Reduction due to an arrangement between SW Department head and Naughton Trucking.
  6. 811 Tipping Fee – Budget  2021  $28,000    2022  $32,000
  7. 812 Trucking Fee (based on per ton)  Budget  2021  $10,000   2022   $10,000  Spent 2021 $7,973
  8. 816 Glass – Budget  2021 $3,500   2022  $3,500   Spent 2021 $2,508.75

 

Total  2022 Solid Waste proposed 2022 budget  $162,300

 

Solid Waste Capital Reserve

1,  968 Lagoon  New permit received in 2019.  there have been off and on discussions to close or keep open the lagoons.  Each year $5,000 is deposited into this CR,  The value is $25,359  (From the 11-8-21 minutes ‘…once the lagoons are given up, then there is very little chance of getting them back if needed. It was pointed out by Selectman Baker that if the lagoons are decommissioned, then there must be a secondary location that can be used to take the effluent.) It was further pointed out that there is a savings to those residents from the provider if the effluent is deposited at the Sutton lagoon.  It was suggested that the soft cap be increased to $30,000, and while no formal vote was taken, the committee supported the suggestion.

  1. 983 Solid Waste Facility CR – Annual contribution $5,000 – value $86,659  This is for back hoe replacement and repairs not under CR 989.

 

The chair observed that a budget line item can be negative at the end of the accounting period.  The department head should notify the BOS of the situation, but not be required to task for permission.  Also mentioned was that the return on trust funds was currently .02%  This means that the one year return on $10,000 is $2.00.

 

Mr. Solimine, Mr. Nelson and BOS liaison Mr, Headley left @ 7:46 PM.

 

  1. 2

 

The chair encouraged committee members to attend Saturday’s (1-7-22) KRSD school board deliberative session @ 9:00 AM.  The chair had passed out the following items:  (a) Solid Waste Budget and CAR  (b) 1-3-22 Actual & Budgeted Expenses & Encumbrance.

 

It was moved by Peterson and 2nd by Mock to accept the minutes of 12-13-21.  The motion was passed w/o dissent.

 

The chair offered the BOS liaison report:

  1. TA salary, formerly $62,000 was increased by the BOS effectively 12-23-21 to $70,000. The recommendation of the BOS for 2022 is to increase the salary to $75,000.  There would also be an increase to the TA’s assistant.
  2. This next item required the committee to go into non-public session, under RSA 91(3)II ‘such a requirement is necessary if there could be personal embarrassment to a member not of the BOS.’  It was moved by Guertin, 2nd by Mock to move into non-public session.  The motion passed and @ 7:53 PM the committee moved into non-public session.   8:23 PM, it was moved by Guertin and 2nd by Peterson to move out of non-public session.  The vote passed w/o dissent. It was then moved by Thompson and 2nd by Peterson to seal the minutes of the non-public session.  This was also approved w/o dissent.

 

The chair and the committee then reviewed the year of 2021 with its successes and challenges.  The committee is subjected to protocols and procedures that are sharply defined.  For example, the committee may consider only the position and not the individual.  The committee is empowered to obtain any and all relevant information in order to perform its designated function, to prepare and defend the town budget for the ensuing year.  There has been a failure, particularly from the BOS to obtain that information.  The cooperation of past years between the two elective bodies has deteriorated, and this is not good for the town or its residents.

 

The budget committee will meet next week, Monday 1-10-22 @ 6:00 PM to review the executive budget with our TA.   The TA will also provide revenue information. The committee will also meet on 1-17-22 also @ 6:00 PM to review said figures and begin to prepare its budget recommendations.

 

The meeting adjourned @ 9:01 PM.

 

Respectfully submitted

 

 

 

Robert W Wright Jr.

Scribe

.