Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-04-23 Annual Town Meeting Warrant ReportTown of Reading Massachusetts � of RFq�'� • Dim ' 9: INC OR40¢� Report on the Warrant Annual Town Meeting April 23, 2012 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING APRIL 23, 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS Article Title Sponsor Pane # 1 Election 2 2 Reports Board of Selectmen 3 3 Instructions Board of Selectmen 4 4 Amending the Capital Improvement Program FY2012 — FY2021 Board of Selectmen 4 5 Establishing an OPEB Trust Fund Board of Selectmen 5 6 Amending the FY2012 Budget Board of Selectmen 7 7 Approving FY2013 to FY2022 Capital Improvement Program Board of Selectmen 8 8 Approve Payment of Prior Year's Bills Board of Selectmen 8 9 Disposition of Surplus Tangible Property Board of Selectmen 9 10 Establishing Revolving Funds Board of Selectmen 10 11 Rescinding Civil Service — Police Department Board of Selectmen 12 12 Accepting a Gift — Friends of Reading Football Scholarship Board of Selectmen 15 13 FY2013 Budget Finance Committee 16 14 Authorizing Chapter 90 Expenditures Board of Selectmen 16 15 Authorizing Debt — Sewer repair /replacement — Tennyson, Whittier, Wordsworth, Browning, Tennyson Circle Board of Selectmen 16 16 Acceptance of easement from Haven Street to "upper' Municipal Parking Lot, and granting an easement for installation of an ATM in the "upper" Municipal Parking Lot Board of Selectmen 17 17 Granting of an Easement for utilities — Ivy Street to Belmont Street Board of Selectmen 19 Article Title Saonsor Paae# 18 Resolution calling for an amendment to the Petition,— Lippitt et al 20 US Constitution to reverse the effects of the US Supreme Court's Citizens United decision that allows unlimited spending by corporations, unions and others in our elections 19 Approval of Affordable Housing Trust Fund Board of Selectmen 21 Allocation Plan 20 Bylaw pursuant to authority of Massachusetts Board of Selectmen 23 General Laws Chapter 6, Section 172B ''/2, enabling the Police Department to conduct State and Federal fingerprint based criminal history checks for individuals applying for various municipally- issued licenses 21 Amending Reading General Bylaw Section Petition Calvo -Bacci et al 28 7.2 — providing for appeals from demolition delay 22 Charter amendment re: number of members Board of Selectmen 29 and minimum votes for write -in of Town Meeting 23 Removal of Town Meeting members Board of Selectmen 31 APPENDIX FY 2011 -FY 2020 Capital Improvements Blue Pages 33 Program FY2013 Budget Yellow Pages 54 Conduct of Town Meeting 259 Town Meeting Handout Guidelines 266 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Middlesex, ss. Officer's Return, Reading: By virtue of this Warrant, I, on February 28, 2012 notified and warned the inhabitants of the Town of Reading, qualified to vote on Town affairs, to meet at the place and at the time specified by posting attested copies of this Town Meeting Warrant in the following public places within the Town of Reading: Precinct 1 J. Warren Killam School, 333 Charles Street Precinct 2 Reading Police Station, 15 Union Street Precinct 3 Reading Municipal Light Department, 230 Ash Street Precinct 4 Joshua Eaton School, 365 Summer Avenue Precinct 5 Reading Library, Local History Room, 64 Middlesex Avenue Precinct 6 Barrows School, 16 Edgemont Avenue Precinct 7 Birch Meadow School, 27 Arthur B Lord Drive Precinct 8 Wood End School, 85 Sunset Rock Lane Town Hall, 16 Lowell Street The date of posting being not less than fourteen (14) days prior to April 23 2012, the date set for Town Meeting in this Warrant. I also caused a posting of this Warrant to be published on the Town of Reading website on February 29 , 2012. A true copy Attest: Laura Gemme, Town Clerk 1 Alan Ulrich, Constable TOWN WARRANT (SEAL) COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Middlesex, ss. To any of the Constables of the Town of Reading, Greetings: In the name of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, you are hereby required to notify and warn the inhabitants of the Town of Reading, qualified to vote in elections and Town affairs, to meet at the Reading Memorial High School Auditorium, 62 Oakland Road, in said Reading, on Monday, April 23, 2012, at seven - thirty o'clock in the evening, at which time and place the following articles are to be acted upon and determined exclusively by Town Meeting Members in accordance with the provisions of the Reading Home Rule Charter ARTICLE 1 To elect by ballot the following Town Officers: A Moderator for one year; One member of the Board of Selectmen for three years; One member of the Board of Assessors for three years; Two members of the Board of Library Trustees for three years; Two members of the Municipal Light Board for three years; Two members of the School Committee for three years; and One Hundred and Ninety Two Town Meeting Members shall be elected to represent each of the following precincts: Precinct 1 Eight members for three years; To vote on the following two questions: April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 2 Report on the Warrant Eight members for two years; Eight members for one year; Precinct .2 Eight members for three years; Eight members for two years; Eight members for one year; Precinct 3 Eight members for three years; Eight members for two years; Eight members for one year; Precinct 4 Eight members for three years; Eight members for two years; Eight members for one year; Precinct 5 Eight members for three years; Eight members for two years; Eight members for one year; Precinct 6 Eight members for three years; Eight members for two years; Eight members for one year; Precinct 7 Eight members for three years; Eight members for two years; Eight members for one year; and Precinct 8 Eight members for three years; Eight members for two years; Eight members for one year; To vote on the following two questions: April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 2 Report on the Warrant Question 1: Shall the Town of Reading approve the amendment to Article 5 of the Reading Home Rule Charter, proposed by the November 14, 2011 Subsequent Town Meeting, which is summarized below: Article 5, Town Manager Section 5 —1 Appointment, Qualifications, Term This amendment will authorize the Board of Selectmen to enter into a contract with the Town Manager for a term not exceeding three (3) years in length. Yes No Question 2: Shall the Town of Reading approve the amendment to Article 7 of the Reading Home Rule Charter, proposed by the November 14, 2011 Subsequent Town Meeting, which is summarized below: Article 7 — Finances and Fiscal Procedures Section 7 -2: Submission of Proposed Budget This amendment modifies the budget process by requiring the Town Manager to consult with the Board of Selectmen on the Municipal Government portion of the budget before submitting the budget to the Finance Committee. Yes No and to meet at the Reading Memorial High School, 62 Oakland Road, in said Reading on MONDAY, the TWENTY -THIRD DAY OF APRIL A.D., 2012 at seven -thirty o'clock in the evening, at which time and place the following Articles are to be acted upon and determined exclusively by Town Meeting Members in accordance with the provisions of the Reading Home Rule Charter. ARTICLE 2 To hear and act on the reports of the Board of Selectmen, Town Accountant, Treasurer - Collector, Board of Assessors, Director of Public Works, Town Clerk, Tree Warden, Board of Health, School Committee, Contributory Retirement Board, Library Trustees, Municipal Light Board, Finance Committee, Cemetery Trustees, Community Planning & Development Commission, Town Manager and any other Official, Board or Special Committee. Board of Selectmen Background: This article appears on the Warrant for all Town Meetings. At this Annual Town Meeting, the following report(s) are anticipated: ➢ State of the Town (Board of Selectmen) April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 3 Report on the Warrant Finance Committee Report: No report. Bylaw Committee Report: No report. ARTICLE 3 To choose all other necessary Town Officers and Special Committees and determine what instructions shall be given Town Officers and Special Committees, and to see what sum the Town will vote to appropriate by borrowing or transfer from available funds, or otherwise, for the purpose of funding Town Officers and Special Committees to carry out the instructions given to them, or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Background: This Article appears on the Warrant of all Town Meetings. There are no known Instructional Motions at this time. The Town Moderator requires that all proposed Instructional Motions be submitted to the Town Clerk in advance so that Town Meeting Members may be "warned" as to the subject of an Instructional Motion in advance of the motion being made. Instructional Motions are normally held until the end of all other business at Town Meeting. Finance Committee Report: No report. Bylaw Committee Report: No report. ARTICLE 4 To see if the Town will vote to amend the FY 2012 - FY 2021 Capital Improvements Program as provided for in Section 7 -7 of the Reading Home Rule Charter and as previously amended, or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Background: This Article is included in every Town Meeting Warrant. Town Bylaws prohibit Town Meeting from approving any Capital Expenditure unless the project is included in the Capital Improvements Program (CIP). Bond ratings agencies also want to ensure that changes to a long -term CIP are adequately described. The following changes are proposed to the 2012 -2021 CIP: General Fund FY12 increase by $194,000: ♦ $ 70,000 DPW Bulldozer to replace 1971 Bulldozer (was scheduled for FY14) ♦ $ 50,000 DPW Highway Pickup with added Hot Box equipment replace 1997 vehicle (was in FY15) ♦ $306,000 additional road repairs funded by 40R (replaces $231,000 road repairs) ♦ $ 39,000 additional sidewalk/pedestrian safety - $25k funded by 40R (replaces $50,000 sidewalks) ♦ $ 10,000 Town facilities — Town Hall carpet FYI increase by $331,250: ♦ $ 58,000 Main St. Fire station floor repairs ♦ $135,000 Sidewalk Snow Plow (replaces two smaller sidewalk Plows $78,000 + $66,750 previously proposed) ♦ ($10,000) street signs eliminated ♦ $230,000 additional road repairs funded by 40R ♦ $ 63,000 additional sidewalk/pedestrian safety funded by 40R FY14 increase by $327,000: ♦ $500,000 Birch Meadow Pavilion (replaces $430,000 Imagination Station) April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 4 Report on the Warrant ♦ $ 45,000 Hunt Park playground (swaps with FY15 $45,000 Wood End upper playground) ♦ $207,000 additional road repairs funded by 40R ♦ $ 50,000 additional sidewalk/pedestrian safety funded by 40R FY15 and beyond: Several additions, deletions and changes Storm Water Enterprise Fund FY14 decrease by $10,000: ♦ $140,000 Drainage Improvement projects (replaces $150,000 Saugus River Design & Permitting) FY15 and beyond: ♦ Several additions, deletions and changes Water Enterprise Fund FY13 increase by $14,000: ♦ $350,000 Ivy St/Belmont St water main (replaces $276,000 Causeway Road water main) ♦ ($ 60,000) Water conservation program moved to operating budget FY14 decrease by $279,000: ♦ $276,000 Causeway Road water main (replaces $350,000 Ivy St/Belmont St water main) ♦. $120,000 Larch Lane water main (moved up from FY15) ♦ ($ 50,000) Water conservation program moved to operating budget ♦ ($225,000) well abandonment moved out to FY16 ♦ ($ 50,000) well upgrade moved to FY15 and increased to $200,000 FY15 and beyond: ♦ Several additions, deletions and changes Sewer Enterprise Fund FY13 increase by $130,000: ♦ $130,000 "Poet's Corner" Sewer Main repair FY14 increase by $645,000: ♦ $ 75,000 for Sewer Main projects ♦ $300,000 for West St. Sewer Station repairs ♦ $270,000 for Joseph's Way Sewer Station repairs FY15 and beyond: ♦ Several additions, deletions and changes — note addition of several Sewer Station repairs Finance Committee Report: The Finance Committee recommends the proposed amendments to the FY 2012 — FY 2021 Capital Improvements Program by a vote of 7 -0 -0 at their meeting on March 28, 2012. Bylaw Committee Report: No report. ARTICLE 5 To see if the Town will vote to adopt Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 32B, Section 20 which allows the Town to set up an irrevocable trust for "Other Post Employment Benefits Liabilities" or take any action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Background: This article will provide for the establishment of a Trust Fund into which the Town may, from time to time, deposit funds which will eventually fully fund the Town's Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) obligation — primarily health insurance for active and retired employees. Accepting April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 5 Report on the Warrant Ch32B sec 20 allows a city, town, district, county or municipal lighting plant to establish a separate fund, to be known as an Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) Liability Trust Fund. Funds will be invested and reinvested by the custodian consistent with the prudent investor rule set forth in chapter 203C. This article does not put any money into the trust. It only establishes the trust so that when we want to vote to fund it, there is a mechanism for us to save and invest. What is OPEB? The term OPEB refers to all benefits, other than pensions, that retirees receive. For public employees in Massachusetts, OPEB largely consists of retiree health insurance but also includes life insurance. Only employees that are in the Reading Contributory Retirement system and retire immediately following employment by the town of Reading, are entitled to these benefits after meeting certain eligibility requirements, a vesting period and minimum retirement age. While it is not currently mandatory to fund the OPEB liability, many communities have begun accumulating funds to meet their obligations. Municipalities should be setting aside money to fund the actuarially determined OPEB obligations, payable in the future, that were incurred for active employees during the year. Then, when the employee retires, the trust fund should have accumulated enough money to pay the health insurance for the retiree. As more communities begin to save money in an OPEB Trust, there could eventually be a mandate from the state that funding begin for all communities, similar to what was done in 1988 for funding retirement obligations. Middlesex League Communities - OPEB Funding Strategies Community Amount Description /Notes Funded Arlington $4,200,000 Annually appropriate the difference between $500K and the non contributory pension appropriation; as non contributories decrease, funded amount increases. Raised the retiree contribution for health insurance from 10% - 15% and annually appropriate this difference to OPEB. Formally earmarked Medicare D reimbursement to OPEB. Belmont $600,000 The Town is trying to develop a policy for an annual funding mechanism. Burlington $0 Town Meeting warrant article to propose funding OPEB in January. Considering allocating a set % of free cash annually, building an amount into the operating budget annually, or both options in combination. Lexington $1,900,000 Town earmarked Medicare D revenues over the past several years to the OPEB trust. Melrose $0 Cily has no funding protocol to date, most likely would need a Prop 2 1/2 override. Reading $0 Town Meeting warrant article to propose funding OPEB in May. Stoneham $0 Town is aggressively funding the pension liability with a projected fully funded date of 2023. Intent is to pay this off and then begin funding OPEB. Plan to set up trust fund soon and potentially add any one time revenues windfall that might be received. Wakefield $50,000 $50K funded from the operating budget in FY12. Town recently joined the GIC and is considering allocating some of the savings achieved to OPEB in future budgets. Watertown $1,075,000 Funds set aside in an OPEB Stabilization Fund (i.e. not a legal OPEB trust fund). Town is on an aggressive funding schedule for pension liability (2022) and intends to reallocate pension funding to OPEB upon fully funded status. Wilmington $100,000 The Town set aside token funds in an account still controlled by the town (i.e. not a le al OPEB trust fund). Considering adding to it this year. Winchester $400,000 Most recently contributed $250K; set up GASB 45 Task Force Woburn $937,086 The City has set aside the Medicare D reimbursement over the past several years in a reserve still controlled by the City i.e. not a legal OPEB trust fund). Finance Committee Report: The Finance Committee recommends the subject matter of this article by a vote of 7 -0 -0 at their meeting on March 14, 2012. This Article simply establishes a Trust Fund as a first step towards addressing Reading's long term liability and commitment to fund retiree healthcare benefits. Over time this will relieve reliance upon the operating budget and will hopefully one day fully fund our obligation. The next Article will begin to fund the liability, and a second deposit is proposed as part of Article 13 (the FY13 Budget). In the April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 6 Report on the Warrant coming months the Finance Committee will meet with Town officials to discuss formalizing a disciplined approach or policy for meeting this long term obligation. Bylaw Committee Report: No report. ARTICLE 6 To see if the Town will vote to amend one or more of the votes taken under Article 28 of the Warrant of the Annual Town Meeting of April 25, 2011 as amended under Article 5 of the Warrant of the Subsequent Town Meeting of November 14, 2011; and to see what sum the Town will vote to appropriate by borrowing or transfer from available funds, or otherwise, as the result of any such amended votes for the operation of the Town and its government, or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Background: The following budget amendments are proposed for the FY12 budget: General Fund -Wages and Expenses Account Line Description Decrease Increase B99 Benefits: $97,000 - $500,000 Health Insurance + $500,000 OPEB Trust Fund - $50,000 Unemployment - $35,000 Medicare - $25,000 Worker Comp. Ins. early payment discount + $13,000 Pension Assessment - military leave C99 Capital: $475,000 +$306,000 DPW Roads* + $ 39,000 DPW curb /sidewalk ($25k from 40R funds *) + $ 70,000 DPW replace 1971 Bulldozer before FY14 + $ 50,000 DPW replace 1997 Hwy pickup before FY15 + $ 10,000 Town Facilities Town Hall carpet E99 Vocational Education $25,000 - $25,000 lower enrollment than anticipated H91 Accounting wages $5,000 + $5,000 overlap for new Town Accountant 191 Finance wages $55,000 - $37,000 Open clerical position not filled - $11,000 Technology position open until filled - $ 7,000 Sur lus from combining elections 192 Finance expenses $50,000 + $24,000 Assessors outsourced property inspection + $11,000 Technology required by new library system + $15,000 Technology for Town Hall K91 Community Services wages $13,000 $ 8,000 Health inspector (now a Melrose employee) $ 5,000 Various positions due to staff turnover K92 Community Services expenses $23,000 + $ 8,000 Health inspector (Melrose employee) + $15,000 Consultant for housing Ian L91 Library wages $1,500 + $1,500 overlap for new librarian April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting Report on the Warrant M91 Public Works wages $20,000 + $20,000 Overtime caused by storms in the fall of 2011 M92 Public Works expenses. $15,000 + $15,000 for variety of xpenses related to fall storms M93 Public Works — Snow & Ice $38,500 M94 Public Works — Street Lights $10,000 M95 Public Works Rubbish $125,000 N91 Public Safety wages — Overtime in Fire department $95,000 V99 Town Facilities $10,000 + $10,000 for Community Service area — handicap accessibility and customer service Subtotals $363,500 $694,500 Subtotals excluding items in *C99 $363,500 Items in *C99 *$331,000 Net from Operating Transfers None *From 40R Smart Growth Stabilization Fund $331,000 Finance Committee Report: The Finance Committee recommends the proposed FY 2012 budget transfers by a vote of 7 -0 -0 at their meeting on March 28, 2012. Bylaw Committee Report: No report. ARTICLE 7 To see if the Town will vote to approve the FY 2013 — FY 2022 Capital Improvements Program as provided for in Section 7 -7 of the Reading Home Rule Charter, or, take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Background: Please see the Blue Pages in the Appendix of this Warrant Report for the FY 2012 — FY 2021 Capital improvements Program. Finance Committee Report: The Finance Committee voted 7 -0 at their March 28, 2012 meeting to recommend the subject matter of this Article. Placing items in the capital improvement program is a prerequisite but does not authorize spending funds towards these items. Bylaw Committee Report: No report. ARTICLE 8 To see if the Town will vote to authorize the payment during Fiscal Year 2012 of bills remaining unpaid for previous fiscal years for goods and services actually rendered to the Town, or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Background: For the Town to pay bills from a prior year requires a special vote of Town Meeting. The following bills from a prior year are due. This will require a 9/10 vote of Town Meeting. ♦ The Engineering Division has a bill from June 2011 for copier maintenance. There was confusion between the parent company and the local office as to who would do the billing and how much it would be. Numerous phone calls to both locations finally produced an invoice for $155 that needs to be paid since the service was provided. ♦ The DPW has a bill in the amount of $78.31 in invoices from last fiscal year for auto parts. April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting Report on the Warrant Finance Committee Report: The Finance Committee recommends the subject matter of this article by a vote of 7 -0 -0 at their meeting on March 14, 2012. Bylaw Committee Report: No report. ARTICLE 9 To see if the Town will vote to authorize the Board of Selectmen to sell, or exchange, or dispose of, upon such terms and conditions as they may determine, various items of Town tangible property, or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Background: Following is a list of surplus vehicles that are scheduled to be disposed of in FY 2012. Town Meeting approval is required for disposition of tangible property with a value of $5000 or more. It is unlikely that any of these items have a value that exceeds that amount, but to be safe, Town Meeting approval is requested. Disposition could be through trade in, auction, or other sale. ♦ Fire - 1996 Chevrolet 2500 Pickup Truck ♦ DPW - 1961 3" Trashmaster centrifugal pump mounted on a 2 wheel trailer, 12 HP Wisconsin engine (not running) ♦ DPW - 1998 Ford Crown Victoria. ♦ DPW - 10' Baker snow plows fixed angle. ♦ DPW - 1973 John Bean Roto -Mist Hydraulic Sprayer. ♦ DPW - 490 Dynahoe backhoe bucket (30 ") ♦ DPW - Lindsay T40HA- Portable Air Compressor (not running) ♦ DPW - 1970 Brodie 4 Wheel Trailer ♦ DPW - 1987 Haban Sickle Bar Mower Attachment ♦ DPW - 1985 Takeuchi Crawler Excavator ♦ DPW - 1995 Holder 6000 with boom flail and blower ♦ DPW - 1971 Cat 951 B Traxcavator ♦ DPW - 1997 F250 pickup ♦ DPW - 2003 Ford F250 pickup ♦ DPW - 2003 Cat 430D, 5 speed, ♦ Police - 2 Ford Crown Victoria Police Cruisers ♦ Police — 2009 Harley Davidson motorcycle ♦ School - 1996 Chevrolet K2500 Utility body pick -up truck ♦ Surplus soil /stone material at the Compost Center site Town Meeting members may be interested in how we disposed of tangible personal property that was authorized last year. Last year we disposed of the following vehicles: ♦ Ford F250 Pickup (1989) DPW /Parks 136K miles Trade -in $ 600 ♦ Ford Explorer (2000) DPW /Engineering 108K miles Trade -in $ 625 ♦ Ford F350 Pickup (1997) DPW/Water 74K miles Trade -in $ 1000 ♦ Ford F350 Pickup (2006) DPW /Sewer 90K miles Trade -in $ 2000 ♦ Ford F250 Pickup (2001) DPW /Sewer 105 miles Trade -in $ 1000 ♦ Elgin Pelican (John Deere) Sweeper (2005) 2658 hours Trade -in $28,000 ♦ Warco Motor Grader (1952) from FY11 surplus Sold after 2 postings $ 606 Total $33.831 Finance Committee Report: The Finance Committee voted 7 -0 at their March 28, 2012 meeting to recommend the subject matter of this Article. This Article authorizes the disposition of surplus property. Bylaw Committee Report: No report. April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting Report on the Warrant ARTICLE 10 To see if the Town will vote to authorize revolving funds for certain Town Departments under Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 44, Section 53E 1/2 for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2012 with the receipts, as specified, credited to each fund, the purposes, as listed, for which each fund may be spent, the maximum amount that may be spent from each fund for the fiscal year, and the disposition of the balance of each fund at fiscal year end. Revolving Spending Revenue Allowed Expenditure Limits Year End Account Authority Source Expenses Balance Fees as provided or in Reading Consulting and engineering Conservation General Bylaws services for the review of $25,000 Commission Section 5.7, designs and engineering Available for Consulting Conservation Wetlands work for the protection of expenditure Fees Commission Protection wetlands. next year Legal, oversight and inspection, plan review, Building Plumbing, initial property appraisals Wiring, Gas and and appeals, Community other permits for Services general $200,000 the Oaktree, management, curb ddison - Wesley/ sidewalks and pedestrian Inspection Pearson and safety improvements, Available for Revolving T own Johnson Woods records archiving and other expenditure Fund Manager developments related costs. next year —project Vaccines, materials for screening clinics and clinical supply costs, medical $25,000 Public Health Clinic Fees and equipment and supplies, Available for Clinics and Board of third party immunizations, educational expenditure Services Health reimbursements materials next year Library Library Charges for lost or Acquire Library materials to Available for Materials Director and damaged Library replace lost or damaged $15,000 expenditure Replacement Trustees materials items next year Utilities and all other Available for Mattera Cabin Recreation maintenance and operating $10,000 expenditure Operating dministrator Rental Fees expenses next year Director of Public Works upon the recommendati on of the . Sale of timber; fees Available for Town Forest for use of the Town Planning and Improvements $10,000 expenditure Town Forest Committee Forest to the Town Forest next year or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Background: The revolving funds established in this article are subject to annual renewal by Town Meeting. Inspections Revolving Fund - Beginning in 2004, Town Meeting approved the Inspections Revolving Funds as a way to deposit building and other permit fees, and to use them directly for purposes of plan April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 10 Report on the Warrant review, inspections, legal expenses, initial property value appraisal and appeals, and general management of the Community Services operations related to three developments as well as for the construction of curbs, sidewalks and pedestrian safety improvements and records archiving and management. The balance available as of February 29 2012 in this fund is $209,962. There is expected to be little expenditure from these funds for FY 2012, as some of these projects have just been getting started. The balance in the fund is from permit fees from Oaktree, Addison - Wesley /Pearson (now Pulte Homes), and a small amount from Johnson Woods developments. • Health Clinic Revolving Fund - The Reading Health Division contracts for third party payments for a number of immunizations. The funds are used to augment the influenza vaccine supply from the State Department of Public Health to insure vaccine for the homebound clients and first responders. The Division also uses these funds for materials for other screening clinics. Clinic client fees are also deposited into this fund to offset vaccine and clinical supply costs. The balance available as of February 29 2012 in this fund is $44,766. The State has been cutting back on the free flu and other vaccines to be distributed to cities and towns, and the Town therefore needs to purchase extra doses. The necessary amounts used for clinic vaccine, supplies and staff salaries related to the clinics each year directly from the revolving fund is therefore approximately $25,000. • Library Materials Replacement Fund — During the course of a year, the Library recovers funds from patrons who have lost or damaged books or other materials. Previously, those funds went.into the Town's General Fund and at the end of the year went into Free Cash. Once this Revolving Fund was adopted (beginning in FY 2010), those funds recovered from patrons for lost or damaged materials were available directly to the Library for expenditure to purchase replacement materials and processing supplies. The balance available as of February 29 2012 in this fund is $2,360. • Mattera Cabin Operating Fund — The log cabin on the Mattera conservation land was purchased several years ago, and was recently renovated by the Vocational School. Some of the use is revenue generating, and it is anticipated that over time the site will generate enough funding to pay the operating costs of the cabin — primarily utilities. This Article allows those revenues that are generated to be used directly for the operating expenses of the cabin. The balance available as of February 29, 2012 in this fund is $2,181. • Town Forest Revolving Fund was created last year. The purpose is to allow revenues from controlled timber harvesting and permit fees to then be spent by the DPW Director upon the recommendation of the Town Forest Committee, on improvements to the Town Forest, including planning efforts. The Town Forest Committee has had a forest stewardship plan created (through a grant) to make recommendations on forest management including controlled timber harvesting. The Committee is in the process of determining how to proceed in beginning this work. In addition, the Town Forest Committee has commissioned a master plan for the Town Forest and adjacent property, and the Master Plan will include recommendations on improvement to the Town Forest. Finally, the Town Forest Committee is beginning to develop policies and regulations on the use of the Town Forest. Since this revolving fund was just created last year, the balance available as of February 29 2012 in this fund is $0. It is anticipated that timber harvesting on a limited basis will begin in FY 2013, and therefore there will be proceeds in the revolving fund which can be used for the purposes of the trust. Finance Committee Report: At its meeting on March 14, 2012 the Finance Committee voted 7 -0 to recommend this Article. Revolving Funds are a way to earmark funds to specific Town services. Each has its own revenue source, purpose, and maximum amount which can be spent. Each Fund is subject to annual Town Meeting approval. Bylaw Committee Report: No report. April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 11 Report on the Warrant ARTICLE 11 To see if the Town will vote to revoke its acceptance of Chapter 468 of the Acts of 1911 which extended the provisions of Civil Service for the Reading Police Department, including the Chief of Police; and further, that this revocation will not affect the Civil Service status of existing personnel in their current positions; or take any other action relating thereto. Board of Selectmen Background: This article would prospectively remove the members of the Reading Police Department from Civil Service, and would allow the Town to conduct its own hiring, promotional, and disciplinary process and decisions without being subject to the dictates of a State Agency — the Civil Service Commission. The Reading Police Department has been in the state Civil Service system since a Town Meeting vote in 1918. At that time there were no unions representing municipal police departments, and very little state legislation or case law dealing with employee rights or responsibilities. This was the era of the famous (or infamous) Boston Police Strike, and Civil Service was looked at nationally as a means of combating corruption in government. Much has changed since that time almost 100 years ago, including the Civil Service system itself. The Civil Service system (known otherwise as the Department of Human Resources) governs, for agencies coming under their jurisdiction: ♦ Initial hiring ♦ Promotions ♦ Discipline Initial Hiring Hiring good qualified people to provide Town Police services is the most important decision that is made in operating a first class Police Department. Civil Service process The initial hiring process is slow, cumbersome, and does not address local needs. It is a state -wide, one size fits all system. There is no local control. The process begins with a state wide exam. Some communities report that they had no or few candidates take the exam this past year. The exam is given in May of the year, and the exam for a community is good for two years. The results of the exam are available in October — five months after the exam is given! When a community has a need to hire a Police Officer, they ask Civil Service for a list of candidates, and the list is sent with the number of people who the community may consider restricted to a formula of 2N +1 — or 3 candidates if you are hiring one Police Officer (it could be more candidates if there are tie scores). The candidate list will be based solely on the score of a written exam, with the exception that veterans and dependents of Police Officers killed in the line of duty are automatically placed at the top of the list. Additionally, if there are any Police Officers anywhere in the Commonwealth who have been laid off and have not been hired back, they also go to the top of the list for consideration. Candidates are then interviewed and the Appointing Authority (Town Manager) makes a decision and a conditional offer of employment, pending successful completion of a psychological exam (paid for by the Town), a medical exam (paid for by the Town), and a Physical Abilities test administered by Civil Service. If the Town Manager selects anyone but the highest ranked candidate, he must put in writing why a higher ranked (based solely on test scores and /or veteran or other preference) was not selected. This decision is subject to an appeal to the Civil Service Commission by anyone who is aggrieved by the decision. Problems with Civil Service The hiring process under Civil Service is very cumbersome and time consuming. To take five months to certify a test in these days is too long — SAT's for example are graded instantaneously. The only criterion that the Town may consider is the test score, background check, and an interview. For the Town to ask for a list of minorities or women to diversify the employment of the Police Department requires a written admission on the part of the Town of past discrimination. At times, the Town has made a decision not to fill a position because none of the candidates available for selection met the needs of the Town. Proposed system If Town Meeting approves this Article, then the Town will be able to develop its own hiring system, as the Town does for all other employees of the Town including DPW, non - union, School employees, RMLD employees etc. There are a number of other communities in the Boston metropolitan area April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 12 Report on the Warrant that do not have Civil Service, and the Town would consider conducting periodic joint examinations for entry level Police Officers. Other non -Civil Service Communities are able to advertise and recruit candidates, including minorities and women. An exam would be conducted, and experience in other communities shows that an exam given on a Saturday can be graded and certified the following Tuesday, and interviews of selected candidates can begin immediately. The cost of the examination is borne by the candidates. The Town may then interview any number of candidates, and the test scores would be considered as one of a number of criteria that can be used in selecting what candidate to interview. The Town can also consider things like education, work background, and other normal hiring criteria. Under this process, hiring will be able to be conducted expeditiously, and there should never be a circumstance where a position is left vacant (at considerable expense because the workload will then have to be picked up on overtime) because none of the candidates meets the needs of the Town. Promotions Promotion of the best candidates to fill leadership positions in the Police Department is critical to carrying out the mission of the Department. Pending Town Meeting approval of this Article, the Town has negotiated with the two unions representing Police Patrol Officers and Police Superior Officers, language that outlines the process of promoting to the ranks of Sergeant and Lieutenant. Civil Service process Similar to the initial hiring process, the promotional process is slow, cumbersome, and does not address local needs. It is a state -wide, one size fits all system. There is no local control. The process begins with a state wide exam. The exam is given in October of the year, and the exam for a community is good for two years. The results of the exam are available in May of the following year — six months after the exam is given! When a community has a need to promote, they take the requisite number of names from the top of the list of candidates, restricted to a formula of 2N +1 — or 3 candidates if you are promoting one Sergeant or Lieutenant (it could be more candidates if there are tie scores). The candidate list will be based solely on the score on a written exam. Candidates are then interviewed and the Appointing Authority (Town Manager) makes a decision. If the Town Manager selects anyone but the highest ranked candidate, he must put in writing why a higher ranked (based solely on test scores) candidate was not selected. This decision is subject to an appeal to the Civil Service Commission by anyone who is aggrieved by the decision. Problems with Civil Service The promotional process under Civil Service is very cumbersome and time consuming. To take six months to certify a test in these days is not necessary — SAT's for example are graded instantaneously. At times, the Town has made a decision not to fill a position because none of the candidates available for selection met the needs of the Town. Proposed system If Town Meeting approves this article, then the Town has developed its own promotional system, as the Town does for all other employees of the Town. This system is embodied in the two union contracts which have been approved subject to Town Meeting approving this article. In addition to alternatives to traditional testing (including conducting an Assessment Center) the Town may consider additional criteria to determine the most qualified candidate for a position. These include: job related experience; performance evaluation in his /her present position (including contributions to the department); supervisory evaluation of the employee's promotion potential; score on promotional exam; sick leave record; formal education; training and education through career development; disciplinary record; philosophical agreement with the Town's and department's vision and goals; work ethic; and initiative. Part of the cost of the promotional examination process is borne by the candidates, as is the case currently under Civil Service. Following the examination or Assessment Center, the Town may then conduct interviews of all candidates and may consider the other criteria listed above in making a selection. Promotions may then be handled expeditiously, and there should never be a circumstance where a position is vacant for any length of time (at considerable expense because the workload will then have to be picked up on overtime). In the past the Town has made a decision not to fill a position because none of the candidates available for selection met the needs of the Town. Discipline The involvement of Civil Service in the disciplinary process of Police Officers of any rank is seldom used in Reading. Contractually, an Officer who is subject to discipline and chooses to appeal their discipline has to choose to either utilize the process under Civil Service, or utilize the process under the April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 13 Report on the Warrant Collective Bargaining Agreement — they cannot process an appeal under both. Nobody in the Police Department can remember the last time a disciplinary action on the local level was appealed to Civil Service. The few times that a disciplinary action has been appealed, it has gone through the grievance and arbitration procedure contained in the Collective Bargaining Agreements. The grievance and arbitration process is less expensive, quicker, and less subject to the arbitrary decisions of the Civil service Commission. °^ y U. lOW[$9O „ r A� � ANDOVER E == W 'V } •1 .\ OOJEIt l YUW wws � cwrox r C ..�evcrox w e�xnlru i Fwsr uslon vesr Police Departments In MA Civil Service System =m ciri savior: sync I@ = Out M Qw savior sys DecanEa 1, 2011 Other Questions /Issues ♦ What is the status of current employees vis -a -vis Civil Service? As long as a current employee retains their current rank, they will still be covered by Civil service. A Police patrol Officer who is currently an employee as of July 1, 2012, will remain under Civil Service as long as they are employed as a Police Patrol Officer. However, if that employee is promoted to the rank of Sergeant, the employee as a Sergeant will no longer be covered by Civil Service ♦ What happens to Police Patrol Officers who have recently taken the Civil Service Exam for promotion to Sergeant? The Town has agreed that those officers who have taken and passed the recent (October 2012) Civil Service exam for promotion to Sergeant will be considered on an equal footing with those who pass the Town exam for the position to be given next fall. The new Sergeant's position will not be under Civil Service. April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 14 Report on the Warrant Finance Committee Report: No report. Bylaw Committee Report: The Bylaw Committee reviewed with the both the Police Chief and the Town Manager the reasons for this article. The reasons are presented above. The Bylaw Committee concurs with those reasons and the actions resulting from this article. The Bylaw Committee recommends the subject matter of this article by a vote of 4 -0 -0. ARTICLE 12 To see if the Town will vote to accept a gift to establish the Friends of Reading Football Scholarship Fund to be administered by the Town of Reading Commissioner of Trust Funds in accordance with the wishes of the donors, or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Background: This article requests that the Town establish the Friends of Reading Football Scholarship Fund to be administered by the Town of Reading Commissioner of Trust Funds in the initial amount of $5,000.00. Any subsequent gifts to the Friends of Reading Football Scholarship Fund and interest earned shall be added to the principal of the Fund and distributed equally on an annual basis as outlined below. The Friends of Reading Football is a duly organized 501.c.3 charitable organization as recognized by the Internal Revenue Service and is designated as a non - profit entity by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Office of the Attorney General. Furthermore, the Friends of Reading Football is in- compliance with the Administrative Services Procedures required by the Reading Superintendent of Schools. The principal balance of the Friends of Reading Football Scholarship shall be expended for the purpose of awarding two annual scholarships to Reading Memorial High School Seniors who have been members in good standing for at least two years in the football program, one of which must be the applicant's senior year. The first scholarships will be awarded in June of 2012. Two annual awards of $250 each, plus accrued interest, will be granted each year. A roster of at least three, and not more than five, qualified applicants will be nominated by the Reading Memorial High School varsity football coaching staff. A list of selected nominees will be referred to the Reading Memorial High School Assistant Principals who will make two final selections from the list of nominees. The criteria for selection of the recipient s of the scholarships shall include the following: 1. The students shall be seniors who have been members of the Reading Memorial High School Varsity football program in good standing for at least two years, of which one year must be the student's senior year; 2. The students shall have a record of demonstrated leadership and good moral character; 3. The students shall have a record of good academic performance; 4. The student shall submit a written statement to the Head Varsity Coach expressing their interest and eligibility for the scholarship. The scholarship shall be awarded annually during the Reading Memorial High School commencement or awards ceremony. Finance Committee Report: No report. Bylaw Committee Report: No report. ARTICLE 13 To see if the Town will vote to determine how much money the Town will appropriate by borrowing, or from the tax levy, or transfer from available funds, or otherwise, for the operation of the Town and its government for Fiscal Year 2013 - beginning July 1, 2012, or take any other action with respect thereto. April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 15 Report on the Warrant Finance Committee Background: Please see the yellow pages in the Appendix of this Warrant Report for the FY 2013 Budget. Finance Committee Report: FINCOM budget votes for each line item from their meeting on March 28, 2012 are shown in the budget section. All lines were approved by a vote of 7 -0 -0. Bylaw Committee Report: No report. ARTICLE 14 To see what sum the Town will vote to appropriate by borrowing, whether in anticipation of reimbursement from the State under Chapter 44, Section 6, Massachusetts General Laws, or pursuant to any other enabling authority or from the tax levy, or transfer from available funds, or otherwise, for highway projects in accordance with Chapter 90, Massachusetts General Laws, or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Background: The purpose of this Article is to make Chapter 90 funds for road improvements available to the Town for expenditure. The Article authorizes expenditures upon receipt of the grant. The FY 2013 Chapter 90 allocation is anticipated to be $603,012, slightly more than the $597,663 for FY 2012. At the time of printing of this warrant, the state was just beginning to approve a multi -year Chapter 90 bond authorization, and the total state -wide FY 2013 appropriation in the proposed bond bill is expected to be $200 million, the same as for FY 2012. Finance Committee Report: At its March 28, 2012 meeting, the Finance Committee voted to recommend the subject matter of Article 14 by a vote of 7 -0. We vote at town meeting each year to approve the acceptance and use of these funds for road improvements from the State, the only issue being the precise sum of money available from the state. Though the final allocation for FY13 for Reading was not known as of this vote; barring any new or different contingencies placed by the State on the funds, the committee believes that that the town should accept whatever level of funding is offered. Bylaw Committee Report: No report ARTICLE 15 To see what sum the Town will raise by borrowing pursuant to G.L. Chapter 44, §7(1) or transfer from available funds, or otherwise, and appropriate for the purpose of making improvements to the Whittier Road, Tennyson Road, Tennyson Circle, Wadsworth Road and Browning Terrace area surface drains, sewers and sewerage systems, including the costs of engineering services, plans, documents, cost estimates, bidding services and all related expenses incidental thereto and necessary in connection therewith, said sum to be spent under the direction of the Town Manager; and to see if the Town will authorize the Town Manager, the Board of Selectmen, or any other agency of the Town to apply for a grant or grants to be used to defray all or any part of said sewer construction and /or reconstruction and related matters; and to see if the Town will vote to authorize the Town Manager to enter into any or all agreements as may be necessary to carryout the purposes of this Article; and to see if the Town will authorize the Town Manager, the Board of Selectmen, or any other agency of the Town to apply for a non - interest bearing loan from the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority, and to authorize the Treasurer - Collector, With the approval of the Board of Selectmen, to borrow pursuant to said loan, or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Background: This Article will be Indefinitely Postponed. The following background is given for Town Meeting's information. April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 16 Report on the Warrant During the recent Inflow and Infiltration study and subsequent video inspection it was determined that the Whittier Road and Tennyson Road area sewer system has numerous structural deficiencies, substantial inflow and infiltration and a cross connection with the drainage system. Based on the extent of the sewer main's deteriorated condition, portions of the sewer system in this area must be replaced and re- habilitated to eliminate inflow and infiltration; correct structural deficiencies; eliminate cross connections to the drainage system; restore the flow capabilities of the sewer system and provide a subsurface drainage system for the elimination of illicit discharges. The project will require the replacement of approximately 600 linear feet of sewer main, perform sewer main spot repairs, manhole replacement; testing and sealing of sewer mains and manholes; the repair and installation of approximately 2600 feet of subsurface drainage systems and appurtenances. The estimated cost is $250,000. The remaining unexpended balance of $120,000 of funds approved under Article 9 of the Warrant at the November 9, 2009 Subsequent Town Meeting will be allocated towards this project, leaving $130,000 in additional funds which are included in the FY 2013 Capital Plan and Sewer Budget previously approved under articles 7 and 13. Finance Committee Report: No report. Bylaw Committee Report: No report. ARTICLE 16 To see if the Town will vote to authorize the Board of Selectmen to grant an easement to Northern Bank and Trust for placement of an ATM machine in the Town owned parking area between Woburn Street and Haven Street in accordance with a plan titled "ATM Kiosk Easement Exhibit Plan ", dated Feb, 24, 2012 prepared by Allen & Major Associates, Inc.; and, further, to see if the Town will vote to authorize the Board of Selectmen to acquire an easement for driveway purposes between Haven Street and the parking area from Northern Bank and Trust in accordance with a plan titled "Access Easement Exhibit Plan ", dated Feb, 24, 2012 prepared by Allen & Major Associates, Inc.; or take any other action related thereto. Board of Selectmen April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 17 Report on the Warrant Backaround: The CPDC is considering site plan approval for the renovations to the MF Charles building. At it's meeting on April 2, 2012 the CPDC approved the site plan, leaving 2 options for the ATM kiosk depending upon Town Meeting action on this article. Th project to redevelop this property has been long awaited since the building was sold about five years ago. One of the opportunities which presents itself is the establishment of two way vehicular access from Haven Street, an improvement to the circulation to the municipal parking lot which has been envisioned in the Master Plan and parking studies for a number of years. This is a unique one time opportunity to establish that access as part of the planning approval for his project. The renovation of the MF Charles building will include a new bank — the owner of the building also owns Northern Bank and Trust. In lieu of the drive through window that has existed along the driveway on the side of the MF Charles building for years, the owner is willing to give the Town an easement over the entire 24 foot driveway, and in exchange the bank would receive an access easement over the municipal parking lot and for the ATM kiosk. The plan below shows both easements. This can be accomplished with no loss of parking, and with full use of the municipal parking lot (the bank drive -up kiosk has a "bypass" lane for through traffic). An added benefit to the project will be site lighting and some much needed landscaping within the municipal lot. Finance Committee Report: No report. Bylaw Committee Report: No report. April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 18 Report on the Warrant MAJOR ARTICLE 17 To see if the Town will vote to authorize the Board of Selectmen, upon approval of the Conservation Commission, to obtain a utility easement for the construction, maintenance, repair and operation of utilities over, across and upon a certain portion of land in the Town of Reading held by it for conservation purposes pursuant to a plan entitled "Belmont Street to Ivy Street Utility Easement" prepared by the Department of Public Works Engineering Division and dated March 5, 2012; and, further, to see if the Town will authorize, empower and direct the Selectmen and the Conservation Commission, to execute, acknowledge and deliver in the name and on behalf of said Town such deeds or other instruments as may be necessary or proper in connection therewith, such deeds or other instruments to be in such form and upon such terms as the Selectmen may deem proper; and, further, that the Town authorize the Selectmen and Conservation Commission to petition the General Court to adopt such legislation as may be necessary to carry out the purpose of this vote, or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Backaround: Over the past several years the Town has continuously made strides to upgrade and rehabilitate the Town's water distribution system as recommended in the 2001 study, performed by Weston and Sampson Engineering. These upgrades help to address poor fire flows, water quality and pressure loss due to undersized or deteriorated mains. In the study the Libby Avenue area was found to have deficient fire flows, providing only 20% of the recommend fire flows. The installation of a new water main connecting the end of Ivy Street to Belmont Street will eliminate a major dead end in the water distribution system; and improve fire flows and water quality to the area. The proposed 8" water main looping Ivy Street to Belmont Street will be cement lined ductile iron pipe approximately 850 feet in length. Approximately 700 feet of the proposed water main will be installed through Town property paralleling the current sewer main which was installed in 1976. The property through which the easement is needed consists of 2 parcels that were taken by the Town for conservation purposes in 1972 and 1974. During a deed research of the Town owned land it was determined that no rights have been reserved for a utility easement. The purpose of this article is to authorize the Selectman to create a thirty (30) foot wide utility easement to permit the proper installation, maintenance and repair of the Town's utilities over conservation controlled Town owned land. The Article will further authorize the Town to request the General Court to adopt legislation as may be necessary to carry out the authorization of the easement. r J _y vBELMONT STREET TO STREET UTILITY EASEMENT., T. s� �y 1 inch = 100 feet,, Finance Committee Report: No report. Bylaw Committee Report: No report. April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 19 Report on the Warrant ARTICLE 18 To see if the Town will adopt the following resolution: We, the voters at the 2012 Annual Town Meeting of the Town of Reading, affirm our belief that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution was designed to protect the free speech rights of people, not corporations. The United States Supreme Court's 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission overturned longstanding precedent prohibiting corporations and unions from spending their general treasury funds in public elections. We believe that the ruling created a serious and direct threat to our democracy and the conduct of free and fair elections, by permitting corporations and others to drown out the voices of ordinary persons. Already we have seen our political process flooded with newly unleashed corporate and other money, resulting in historically unprecedented campaign expenditures. The people of the United States have previously used the Constitutional Amendment process to correct decisions of the United States Supreme Court that invade or invalidate democratic institutions, including elections. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT WE, THE VOTERS AT THE 2012 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING OF THE TOWN OF READING, CALL UPON THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS TO PASS AND SEND TO THE STATES FOR RATIFICATION A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO RESTORE THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND FAIR ELECTIONS TO THE PEOPLE, AND FURTHER, WE CALL UPON THE MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL COURT TO PASS ONE OR MORE RESOLUTIONS ASKING FOR THOSE ACTIONS. The Town Clerk of the Town of Reading shall send a copy of this resolution to the state and federal representatives and senators serving the Town of Reading, and to the Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the President of the United States, and take any other appropriate action relative thereto. Or take any other action with respect thereto By Petition John Lippitt et al Background: A little more than two years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court made a precedent- breaking decision. In a five -to -four vote on a case called Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (Citizens United for short), the court ruled that corporations and unions have the same rights to freedom of speech as U.S. citizens under the Bill of Rights. The court expanded on previous rulings that said that spending money to deliver a political message counts as speech. It held, for the first time, that corporations have the right to spend unlimited corporate funds to support or oppose candidates for elected office. This overturned the 1907 law banning corporate contributions signed by President Theodore Roosevelt, who said, "All contributions by corporations to any political committee or for any political purpose should be forbidden bylaw." WHAT DOES THIS TOWN MEETING RESOLUTION DO? The resolution presented here to Town Meeting states that: • Free speech rights belong to people not corporations or other organizations, and • Unlimited spending by corporations and others in our elections presents a real danger to our democracy because corporations and others with wealth can drown out the voices and interests of all of us ordinary citizens. April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 20 Report on the Warrant This resolution calls: On Congress to pass an amendment to our Constitution to clearly establish that money is not the same as speech, and that human beings, not corporations, are entitled to constitutional rights such as free speech, and On our State Legislature to pass a resolution supporting a Constitutional amendment. Such a resolution, Senate Bill 772, is being considered by the Legislature. It had a hearing on February 28th and a committee vote is expected to have occurred by March 21. WHO ELSE SUPPORTS OVERTURNING CITIZENS UNITED? Fifteen cities or towns in Massachusetts, including Boston, and hundreds of communities across the United States have passed similar resolutions calling for a Constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United, including Los Angeles, New York, and the 55 VT towns that passed resolutions on March 6. At least two state legislatures (HI & NM) have passed such resolutions and a number of state legislatures are considering them. Citizens all across the country have concluded that unlimited campaign spending by corporations and wealthy individuals means that our elections will not be a fair fight. Democracy's foundation, government of, by, and for the People, is undermined by the influence of money on elections and government decision - making. If, as Citizens United asserts, money equals speech, then those with more money have louder voices and those with no money have no voice. This flies in the face of the principles of our democracy and the Constitution that our founders wrote. Over 200 groups have formed a loose coalition working to overturn Citizens United, including Move to Amend, Common Cause, the National Lawyers Guild, the Unitarian Universalist Association, and Veterans for Peace. The Montana Supreme Court upheld the state's 1912 law limiting corporate spending in campaigns, despite a lower court ruling that Citizens United had invalidated the law in question. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals similarly upheld a New York City law that places limits on political contributions. WHY IS OVERTURNING THE CITIZENS UNITED DECISION SO IMPORTANT? With the 2012 election season underway, the consequences of the Citizens United decision are becoming clearer by the day. Some wealthy individuals and corporations are already contributing millions of dollars to Super PACs, which have already spent over $40 million in the Republican presidential primaries. The amount spent to date is a drop in the bucket compared to the hundreds of millions of dollars that these Super PACs have stated they will raise and spend during the entire 2012 election period. The unleashing of corporate funds has dramatically expanded possible election spending and, therefore, concerns that elected officials will be more responsive to contributors and their money than to constituents. The Open Secrets project at the Center for Responsive Politics calculated that even before Citizens United roughly 72% ($3.4 billion) of all campaign contributions in 2007 -2010 came from the business sector (individuals and organizations), with labor contributing 4% ($172 million), ideological groups 7% ($308 million), and others 17 %. Now we can expect even greater business sector dominance. Finance Committee Report: No report. Bylaw Committee Report: No report. ARTICLE 19 To see if the Town will vote to approve an Affordable Housing Trust Fund Allocation Plan pursuant to Chapter 140 of the Acts of 2001 entitled "AN ACT AUTHORIZING THE TOWN OF READING TO ESTABLISH AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND ", or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Background: The purpose of this Article is to approve an Affordable Housing Trust Fund Allocation Plan approved by the Board of Selectmen. Chapter 140 of the Acts of 2001 authorized the Town of Reading to establish an Affordable Housing Trust Fund (AHTF). April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 21 Report on the Warrant ♦ "The Town of Reading may establish a separate fund to be known as the Affordable Housing Trust Fund for the purpose of creating or preserving affordable housing ... for the purpose of creating, maintaining or operating affordable housing." ♦ The AHTF may "develop new or rehabilitate existing dwelling units for purchase or rental by low and moderate income housing purchasers or tenants;" ♦ "Expenditures shall follow an allocation, plan submitted by the Board of Selectmen annually to Town Meeting at the Annual Town Meeting, and approved by Town Meeting." ♦ "all expenditures from the fund.... shall be in accordance with the allocation plan and approved by a majority vote of the full combined memberships of the Board of Selectmen and the Reading Housing Authority." The purpose of the Affordable Housing Allocation Plan is to provide a framework for the Town to expend funds on affordable housing. The current balance is $259,077. Funds have been accumulated over the years as funds were secured for the purpose by the CPDC, and funds deposited in one instance when an existing affordable unit was no longer able to be kept affordable after efforts were made to do so. There are no Town tax generated funds in the AHTF. The only expenditure to date from the AHTF is an amount of $200,000 for Oaktree development to provide an additional 3 affordable housing units. That sum is in escrow and by the fall of 2012 the Town will know whether any or all of it has been utilized. Pending that information, the Board of Selectmen has indicated that it may ask to transfer funds from the 40R payments to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund next fall. Under Article 6 of this Annual Town Meeting, approval was received for hiring a consultant to update the Town's Housing Plan, including the 5 year "Housing Production Plan ". This effort is important as a defense against unfriendly 40B developments in the community, and requires the Town to develop a phased plan to produce housing to reach the 10% threshold as required by the 40B statute. As part of these planning efforts, the Town will evaluate how the AHTF can best be used to support the "Planned Production" goals of the Housing Plan,. and it is expected that at the 2013 Annual Town Meeting the Affordable Housing Allocation Plan will be fleshed out in better detail, although it is important that the plan remain as flexible as possible to enable the Town to respond to opportunities as they arise. An additional initiative that is being considered is to join a regional consortium which would assist the member communities in monitoring and administering the Town's responsibilities for the various affordable housing developments that exist and will be developed in the future, to maintain the affordable units that the Town has worked so hard to create. This would be a potential use of the "Administrative" monies designated by the Affordable housing Allocation Plan. At it's meeting on March 27, 2012, the Board of Selectmen voted to approve the following as the FY 2013 Affordable Housing Trust Fund Allocation Plan: Affordable Housing Trust Fund Allocation Plan March 27, 2012 Pursuant to Article 19 of the 2012 Annual Town Meeting, an Affordable Housing Trust Fund Allocation Plan for the Fiscal Year 2013 in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 140 of the Acts of 2001 is as follows: Available Balance — Unrestricted Funds: $ 259,077 Available Balance — Restricted Funds $ 0 Unrestricted funds shall be used for the following purposes: $5,000 or a maximum of 2% for administration of Affordable Housing Remainder for constructing affordable housing (including loan and grant programs); or for maintaining and improving affordability of existing housing stock, or for the purchase of existing housing stock to add it to or maintain it as a part of the existing affordable housing inventory April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 22 Report on the Warrant Finance Committee Report: At its March 14, 2012 meeting, the Finance Committee voted to recommend the subject matter of Article 19 by a vote of 7 -0. The allocation plan though sparse in detail will be more fully developed in the upcoming fiscal year with the assistance of a consultant hired by the Board of Selectman and the Reading Housing Authority to develop a more complete Housing Plan for the town. We believe that in order to support the goals of the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, the allocation plan must be flexible and allow for entering into agreements during the upcoming fiscal year as opportunities arise. We believe that the provisions of the AHTF provide a fiscally responsible mechanism for approving the use of funds, with a majority vote of the combined memberships of the Board of Selectmen and Reading Housing Authority required for all expenditures. Bylaw Committee Report: No report. ARTICLE 20 To see if the Town will vote to add section 5.4 to the Town of Reading General Bylaw as follows 5.4 Criminal History Check Authorization 5.4.1 Fingerprint Based Criminal History checks The Police Department shall, as authorized by Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 6, Section 172 B 1/2, conduct State and Federal Fingerprint Based Criminal History checks for individuals applying for the following licenses: • Hawking and Peddling or other Door -to- Door Salespeople, (Police Chief) • Manager of Alcoholic Beverage License (Board of Selectmen) • Owner or Operator of Public Conveyance (Board of Selectmen) • Dealer of Second -hand Articles (Board of Selectmen) • Hackney Drivers, (Board of Selectmen) • Ice Cream Truck Vendors (Board of Health) 5.4.1.1 Notification At the time of fingerprinting, the Police Department shall notify the individual fingerprinted that the fingerprints will be used to check the individual's criminal history records. The Police Chief shall periodically check with the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security ( "EOPSS ") which has issued an Informational Bulletin which explains the requirements for town by- laws and the procedures for obtaining criminal history information, to see if there have been any updates to be sure the Town remains in compliance. 5.4.1.2 State and national criminal records background checks Upon receipt of the fingerprints and the appropriate fee, the Police Department shall transmit the fingerprints it has obtained pursuant to this by -law to the Identification Section of the Massachusetts State Police, the Massachusetts Department of Criminal Justice Information Services (DCJIS), and /or the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) or the successors of such agencies as may be necessary for the purpose of conducting fingerprint -based state and national criminal records background checks of license applicants specified in this by -law. 5.4.1.3 Authorization to conduct fingerprint -based state and national criminal record background checks The Town authorizes the Massachusetts State Police, the Massachusetts Department of Criminal Justice Information Systems (DCJIS), and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and their successors, as may be applicable, to conduct fingerprint -based state and national criminal record background checks, including of FBI records, consistent with this by -law. The Town authorizes the Police Department to receive and utilize State and FBI records in connection with such background checks, consistent with this by -law. The State and FBI criminal history will not be disseminated to unauthorized entities. Upon receipt of a report from the FBI or other appropriate criminal justice agency, a record subject may request and receive a copy of his /her criminal history record from the Police Department. Should the record subject seek to amend or correct his /her April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 23 Report on the Warrant record, he /she must take appropriate action to correct said record, which action currently includes contacting the Massachusetts Department of Criminal Justice Information Services (DCJIS) for a state record or the FBI for records from other jurisdictions maintained in its file. An applicant that wants to challenge the accuracy or completeness of the record shall be advised that the procedures to change, correct, or update the record are set forth in Title 28 CFR 16.34. The Police Department shall not utilize and /or transmit the results of the fingerprint -based criminal record background check to any licensing authority pursuant to this by -law until it has taken the steps detailed in this paragraph. 5.4.1.4 Municipal officials should not deny an applicant the license based on information in the record until the applicant has been afforded a reasonable time to correct or complete the information, or has declined to do so. The Police Department shall communicate the results of fingerprint -based criminal record background checks to the appropriate governmental licensing authority within the Town as listed. The Police Department shall indicate whether the applicant has been convicted of, or is awaiting final adjudication for, a crime that bears upon his or her suitability or any felony or misdemeanor that involved force or threat of force. controlled substances or a sex - related offense. 5.4.1.5 Regulations The Board of Selectmen, is authorized to promulgate regulations for the implementation of the proposed by -law, but in doing so it is recommended that they consult with the Chief of Police, Town Counsel and the Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security (or its successor agency) to ensure that such regulations are consistent with the statute, the FBI's requirements for access to the national database, and other applicable state laws. 5.4.2 Use of Criminal Record by Licensing Authorities Licensing authorities of the Town shall utilize the results of fingerprint -based criminal record background checks for the sole purpose of determining the suitability of the subjects of the checks in connection with the license applications specified in this by -law. A Town licensing authority may deny an application for a license on the basis of the results of a fingerprint -based criminal record background check if it determines that the results of the check render the subject unsuitable for the proposed occupational activity. The licensing authority shall consider all applicable laws, regulations and Town policies bearing on an applicant's suitability in making this determination. The Town or any of its officers, departments, boards, committees or other licensing authorities is hereby authorized to deny any application for, including renewals and transfers thereof, for any person who is determined unfit for the license, as determined by the licensing authority, due to information obtained pursuant to this by -law. 5.4.3 Fees The fee charged by the Police Department for the purpose of conducting fingerprint -based criminal record background checks shall be determined by the Board of Selectmen and shall not exceed one hundred dollars ($100). The Town Treasurer shall periodically consult with Town Counsel and the Department of Revenue, Division of Local Services regarding the proper municipal accounting of those fees. A portion of the fee, as specified in Mass. Gen. Laws Chapter 6, Section 172B 1/2, shall be deposited into the Firearms Fingerprint Identity Verification Trust Fund, and the remainder of the fee may be retained by the Town for costs associated with the administration of the fingerprinting system. 5.4.4 Effective Date This by -law shall take effect May 4, 2012, so long as the requirements if G.L. c. 40 sec. 32 are satisfied. Or take any other action with respect thereto Board of Selectmen Background: In 2010 the Massachusetts Legislature incorporated language within the Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) Reform Law that adds Massachusetts General Law (MGL) Chapter 6, Section 172 % which becomes effective May 4, 2012. This new section allows municipal officials to enact by -laws that April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 24 Report on the Warrant require fingerprint -based state and national criminal history checks of applicants for licenses in specified occupations. Currently the Police Department is unable to conduct fingerprint -based record checks and cannot use the multi -state criminal offender check system on vendors who often travel door to door within our community. Many of these transient vendors are from out -of -state and a local Massachusetts record check fails to reveal any previous criminal history, while the subject may have extensive violent out -of -state criminal history. The passing of this by -law is the first step in a multi -step process. The bylaw will need to be reviewed by the Attorney General's Office, the Massachusetts State Police State ID Section and the MA Department of Criminal Justice Information Services (DCJIS). Following their reviews, the bylaw will then be reviewed by the FBI Access Integrity Unit. Finally, the Board of Selectmen is authorized by the Bylaw to develop regulations to implement it, and the Board must consult with the Chief of Police, Town Counsel and the Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security on these regulations. There are clear guidelines within the Bylaw as to how the fingerprint based checks are to be used as well as an appeal process for the applicant to correct or complete information on the record check. The record check also cannot be disseminated to anyone who is not authorized to receive it. The Massachusetts Police Chiefs Association General Counsel, worked with the Attorney General's Office, in consultation with the staff of the EOPSS /CHSB (DCJIS) and FBI, to reach a consensus on the wording of the sample by -law that a community might adopt that would meet with everyone's approval. The following is an Informational Bulletin from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Public Safety on this matter: THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND SECURITY Department of Criminal Justice Information Services 200 ARLINGTON STREET, SUITE 2200 CHELSEA, MASSACHUSETTS 02150 WWW. MASS. GOV /CHSB THE COMMONWEALTH'S PROVIDER OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE INFORMATION SERVICES TEL: 617 - 660 -4600 • TTY: 617 - 660 -4606 • FAX: 617 - 660 -4613 Deval L. Patrick Governor Mary Elizabeth Heffernan Secretary of Public Safety and Security Timothy P. Murray Lieutenant Governor James F. Slater, III Acting Commissioner Informational Bulletin Civil Fingerprinting - Chapter 256 of the Acts of 2010 Effective May 4, 2012 What is the new law that permits municipal officials to conduct fingerprint based state and national criminal history records checks on license applicants? On August 6, 2010, the Governor signed into law Chapter 256 of the Acts of 2010, "An Act Reforming the Administrative Procedures Relative to Criminal Offender Record Information and Pre- and Post -Trial Supervised Release." Section 23 of this new law, which takes effect on May 4, 2012, adds c. 6, §1726 '/: to the Massachusetts General Laws and creates an umbrella statute under which municipal officials may enact ordinances to require state and national criminal history record checks of applicants for licenses in specified occupations. This new section provides: Municipalities may, by local ordinance, require applicants for licenses in specified occupations to submit a full set of fingerprints for the purpose of conducting a state and national criminal history records check pursuant to sections 168 and 172 and 28 U.S.C. §534. Fingerprint submissions may be submitted by the licensing April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 25 Report on the Warrant authority to the identification unit within the department of state police through the criminal history systems board, or its successor, for a state criminal records check and to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for a state and national criminal records check. Municipalities may, by local ordinance, establish the appropriate fee charged to applicants for administering a fingerprinting system. For the purposes of section 2LLL of chapter 29, $30 of the fee shall be deposited into the Firearms Fingerprint Identity Verification Trust Fund and the remainder of the fee may be retained by the licensing authority for costs associated with the administration of the system.1 1 While Chapter 256 of the Acts of 2010 refers only to "ordinances," the Massachusetts General Laws define "ordinance" as a term synonymous with "bylaw." G.L. c. 4, §7, cl. Twenty second. Thus, for the purposes of M.G.L. c. 6, §1726'/2, both cities and towns may avail themselves of these statutory provisions to establish a state and nation criminal history records check for civil fingerprinting for designated municipal licenses. What are the requirements for a municipal ordinance that authorizes fingerprint based state and national criminal history records checks on municipal license applicants? The FBI will not permit municipalities access to the national criminal history records database unless the municipality has an ordinance or by -law that meets the following requirements: ❑ The ordinance must reference the authorizing statute, Mass. Gen. Laws c. 6, § 1726'/2. ❑ The ordinance must require fingerprinting of a licensing applicant. ❑ The ordinance must authorize the use of FBI records to conduct state and national criminal history records checks. ❑ The ordinance must identify specific categories of licensing applicants to be screened and may not be overly broad in its scope. ❑ The ordinance must clearly state that FBI criminal history will not be disseminated to unauthorized entities. Once the FBI AIU has approved a municipal ordinance, how does a municipality conduct fingerprint based state and national criminal history records checks on license applicants? ❑ The ordinance must be forwarded to the State Identification Section of the Massachusetts State Police (SIS) and copied to the Massachusetts Department of Criminal Justice Information Services Office of the General Counsel (DCJIS OGC). SIS will submit the ordinance for approval by the FBI Access Integrity Unit (AIU). Once approved, the FBI will add the ordinance to the FBI Massachusetts Approved Statute List. SIS will also maintain a Massachusetts Approved Ordinance List. ❑ Once the municipal ordinance has been approved by the FBI AIU, the municipality must contact both the SIS a nd DCJIS OGC to establish the business processes required for the implementation of a state and national criminal records check system, including the assignment of an Originating Agency Identifier (ORI). Contact information for both agencies appears below. Li Once these business processes have been established, a licensing applicant may be fingerprinted at the police department of the municipality in which he or she is seeking a municipal license. ❑ The police department will forward the applicant's fingerprints either electronically or manually to the SIS which will submit them to the FBI. All fingerprint submissions must contain the ordinance number or correct city code citation in the "Reason Fingerprinted" block of the fingerprint submission form. ❑ The results of the state and national criminal history records will be returned directly to the live scan fingerprint device of the submitting department and /or a designated secure website managed by DCJIS. ❑ It is the responsibility of the submitting department to review the results of the criminal history check and determine suitability of the license applicant. For results that are returned without a disposition to a charge, the submitting department is responsible for gathering the missing disposition(s). The CJIS may be used to contact out -of -stake agencies using the International Justice and Public Safety (Nlets) message keys. Once the municipal licensing authorities receive the state and national criminal history records check results, what are their responsibilities? ❑ Any non -law enforcement municipal employee who as a result of this process receives and reviews, or maintains state and national criminal history records check results must first complete DCJIS's information security /identification verification training, as well as DCJIS CORI training. ❑ Municipal officials responsible for determining suitability for licensing must provide the applicant with the opportunity to challenge the accuracy or completeness of the FBI criminal history. April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 26 Report on the Warrant ❑ Municipal officials should not deny an applicant the license based on information in the record until the applicant has been afforded a reasonable time to correct or complete the information, or has declined to do so. ❑ If the applicant wants to challenge the accuracy or completeness of the record, municipal officials must advise the applicant that the procedures to change, correct, or update the record are set forth in Title 28 CFR 16.34. How much will obtaining a fingerprint based state and national criminal history records check cost? ❑ Pursuant to M.G.L. c. 6, §1726'/2, each municipality can set its own state and national criminal records check fee structure by ordinance. The new law requires that municipalities deposit $30.00 of this fee into the Commonwealth's Firearms Fingerprint Identity Verification Trust Fund. DCJIS and the SIS will establish a payment system through which police departments make these deposits. Municipal licensing authorities may keep the remainder of the fees for costs associated with the administration of its state and national criminal history records check system. What other requirements for conducting fingerprint based state and national criminal history records check do municipalities need to know about? ❑ The state and national criminal history check results may only be used for the purpose requested, that is, screening for specific licenses. ❑ A state and national criminal history records background check for civil licensing purposes may only be conducted based on a fingerprint check as authorized by a municipal ordinance and may not be conducted based on name and date of birth. ❑ A federal background check may not be conducted for municipal employment applicants unless such employment involves a position requiring a license issued by the municipality. ❑ All municipal entities that conduct fingerprint based state and national criminal history checks will be subject to audit by the DCJIS. ❑ Each municipal entity will be required to develop and maintain written policies and procedures for its fingerprint based national criminal history records check system. Once an ordinance for civil fingerprinting has passed, who should a municipality contact? Once a municipality passes a civil fingerprinting ordinance, it should contact the following: Commanding Officer Massachusetts State Police State Identification Section 59 Horse Pond Rd. Sudbury, Ma 01776. (508) 358 -3170 Additionally, a copy of the ordinance or by law must be sent to the DCJIS OGC by email at dciisorintsastate.ma.us. The State Identification Section will respond with detailed instructions and the next steps required for implementing a state and nation criminal history record check system.2 2 Please note, all proposed by -laws or ordinances must still be approved by the Massachusetts Attorney General's Office Municipal Law Division. NOTE: Municipalities are not allowed to submit any state or national fingerprint checks until authorized by the DCJIS and the SIS. The DCJIS and the SIS will publish guidelines and detailed processes prior to commencement of this program. Federal law prohibits police departments from conducting name and date of birth national criminal history records check for non - criminal justice purposes (i.a., licensing). Finance Committee Report: No report. Bylaw Committee Report: The Bylaw Committee recommends the subject matter of this Article by a vote of 4 -0 -0. April 23, 2012 Annual. Town Meeting 27 Report on the Warrant ARTICLE 21 To see if the Town will vote to Amend Section 7.2 of the Town of Reading General Bylaw by inserting the following new language as Section 7.2.3.8: 7.2.3.8 Appeal The owner of record may appeal from either or both of the: Inclusion on the list of Potentially Significant Structures Conditions of demolition delay by filing a.written notice of appeal within fourteen (14) days of the date of said decision, with both the Chairman of the Historical Commission and the Chairman of the Board of Selectmen. Within twenty -one (21) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the Board of Selectman shall convene an appeal hearing which shall include the Historical Commission and the owner of record, (or their attorney, or other designated representative) for the purpose of adjudicating the appeal. The appeal shall review the record of the proceedings before the Historical Commission and input provided by the applicant and HisCom representatives. Notice of the hearing shall be given to the parties and to abutters within 300 feet of the property. Within fourteen (14) days of the conclusion of the hearing, the Board of Selectmen will render a decision on the appeal. or take any other action with respect thereto. Background: The recently added properties to the list were without any guidelines. Amending the bylaw will insure a Currently those property owners who were added to the list action which is costly for the property owner and the town. Finance Committee Report: No report. By Petition Erin Calvo -Bacci et al not done so in a clear and concise process and proper appeal process for the property owner. without a proper appeal process must take legal Bylaw Committee Report: The Bylaw Committee recommended changes to this article so that a process could be put in place for appeal on being initially included on list of potentially historical structures. The recommend changes would result in the article being only applied to the initial inclusion and would not affect the demolition delay. Provided the changes are accepted the Bylaw Committee recommends the article. The Bylaw Committee recommends the subject matter of this article by a vote of 3 -0 -1, providing that the motion proposed is as follows: Move that the Town vote to Amend Section 7.2 of the Town of Reading General Bylaw by inserting the following new language as Section 7.2.3.8: 7.2.3.8 Appeal The owner of record may appeal from either or bolh of inclusion on the list of Potentially Significant Structures by filing a written notice of appeal within 'teen (14) thirty (30) days of the date of said desisiea— notice of inclusion, with both the Chairman of the Historical Commission and the Chairman of the Board of Selectmen. April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 28 Report on the Warrant Within twenty -one (21) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the Board of Selectman shall convene an appeal hearing which shall include the Historical Commission and the owner of record, (or their attorney, or other designated representative) for the purpose of adjudicating the appeal. The appeal shall review the record of the proceedings before the Historical Commission and input provided by the applicant and HisGem Historical Commission representatives. Notice of the hearing shall be given to the parties and to abutters within 300 feet of the property. Within fourteen (14) days of the conclusion of the hearing, the Board of Selectmen will render a decision on the appeal. ARTICLE 22 To see if the Town will vote to authorize the. Board of Selectmen to petition the Great and General Court for a Special Act which will amend sections of Article 2 of the Reading Home Rule Charter as follows (note — ugh represents language to be eliminated and bold represents new language): Section 2 -1: Composition The legislative body of the Town shall be a representative Town Meeting consisting of one hundred ninety two 0823 forty four (144) members from eight (8) precincts who shall be elected to meet, deliberate, act and vote in the exercise of the corporate powers of the Town. Each precinct shall be equally represented in Town Meetings by members so elected that the term of office of one -third of the members shall expire each year. Any increase or reduction in the number of members of Town Meeting shall be phased in equally over a three year period Section 2 -3: Town Meeting Membership The registered voters in every precinct shall elect Town Meeting Members in accordance with all applicable election laws. Whenever any precincts are revised, the registered voters shall elect tweet 4) eighteen (18) Town Meeting Members to represent the precinct. Terms of office shall be determined by the number of votes received. The eight (8) six (6) candidates receiving the highest number of votes shall serve for three (3) years, the eight (8) six (6) receiving the next highest number of votes shall serve for two (2) years, and the next eight (8) six (6) candidates receiving the next highest number of votes shall serve for one (1),year from the day of election. In the event of a tie, ballot position shall determine the order of finish. At each Annual Election thereafter, the registered voters in each precinct shall elect eight(8) six (6) Town Meeting Members to represent the precinct, and shall also elect Town Meeting Members to fill any vacant terms. After the revision of precincts, the term of office of all Town Meeting Members from the revised precincts shall cease upon the election of their successors. After each election of Town Meeting Members, the Town Clerk shall notify each Town Meeting Member of his election by mail. To be qualified for election on a write -in vote for a vacant Town Meeting position, the write -in candidate must receive at least ten (10) write -in votes. In the event of a tie write -in vote for a vacant Town Meeting position, the position shall be filled by a vote of the remaining Town Meeting Members of the precinct, from the write -in candidates whose write -in votes were tied with at least ten (10) write -in votes. The Town, Clerk shall give notice of the tie vote to the remaining Town Meeting Members of the precinct. The Town Clerk shall set a time and place for a precinct meeting for the purpose of filling the vacancy. The Town Clerk shall give notice of the meeting to precinct Town Meeting Members at least seven (7) days in advance and shall publish legal notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the community. A vacant position filled in this manner shall be filled for the entire remainder of the term. Or take any other action with respect thereto Board of Selectmen Background: Article 22, if approved by Town Meeting, the State legislature, and the voters of the Town, would make two changes to the Reading Home Rule Charter: April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 29 Report on the Warrant ♦ The number of members of Town Meeting would be reduced from the current 192 members (24 per precinct times 8 precincts) to 144 members (18 per precinct times 8 precincts); and • To be elected by a write -in vote, a Town Meeting member would need to receive not less than 10 votes. Due to re- princting as a result of the 2010 Federal census, all Town Meeting members were required to run for re- election in March 2012. Candidates took out nomination papers for only 70% of the available seats on Town Meeting. This means that 30% of the Town Meeting seats were filled by either write -in votes, or votes of the remainder of the members of the respective precincts. In the election that took place on March 6, 2012, 43 members were elected with fewer than 10 write in votes, or over 22% of the seats. Only 8 Town Meeting members were elected with more than 10 write in votes. Looking at the past 5 years (not including 2012) as a sample, there was no time when there were as many people running for Town Meeting seats as there were available seats. The 5 year average was 82 %, and the range was from a low of 66% in 2008, to a high of 92% in 2007. Additionally, an average of 19% of the Town Meeting seats over the 5 year period was filled by 10 or fewer write -in votes. The number 10 is significant because it takes 10 signatures on a nomination paper to get on the ballot for a Town Meeting seat. Method of Election of Town Meeting members 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 5 Year Average 2007 to 2011 5 year average % filled by method noted Number of Seats available on Election Day 192 68 70 65 71 65 67.8 8 Number of Names on Ballot 134 52 63 56 47 60 55.6 86.88% Write -In Elected with 10 or less Votes 0 13 11 6 23 8 12.2 19.06% Write -In Elected with 11 or more Votes 0 1 1 1 3 0 1.2 1.88% Number Appointed by Precinct 0 3 4 8 4 0 3.8 5.94% TMM vacancies end of year 0 8 3 1 3 0 3 TMM removed due to attendance 0 5 1 4 10 3 4.6 % of seats with candidates on the ballot 69.8% 76.5 90% 86.2% 66.2% 92.3% 82% It is clear then, that not even counting for competition for Town Meeting seats, there are not enough residents of the community interested in being Town Meeting members to sustain a Town Meeting of 192 members. When the Board of Selectmen discussed this potential Charter Amendment to reduce the size of Town Meeting because of.a lack of candidates on the ballot over the past 5 years, the Board asked what the experience was in 2002, the last time that all 24 positions per precinct were on the ballot, due to "re- precincting ". The following table shows the number of candidates that had taken out papers in 2002, per precinct, and in every precinct there were at least enough candidates running for Town Meeting seats to fill all positions from the printed ballot, and in half the precincts there were contested races. This clearly shows a change since 10 years ago in interest in running for Town Meeting. Over the history of the Representative Town Meeting in Reading (adopted in 1943), adjustments in the number of Town Meeting positions have been made from time to time. April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 30 Report on the Warrant Precinct Precinct Precinct Precinct Precinct Precinct Precinct Precinct 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Number of Candidates 29 24 24 25 24 29 29 24 Over the history of the Representative Town Meeting in Reading (adopted in 1943), adjustments in the number of Town Meeting positions have been made from time to time. April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 30 Report on the Warrant The process of making these Charter changes would be: ♦ Approval at Town Meeting — April 2012 ♦ Filing of a "Special Act" with the State Legislature (our State Reps and Senator have agreed to sponsor this and have in fact prepared draft legislation) — May 2012 ♦ Passage of the Special Act, signed by the Governor — Summer /Fall 2012 ♦ Approval of the Charter amendment by Reading's voters — November 2012 or April 2013 Finance Committee Report: No report. Bylaw Committee Report: The Bylaw Committee is concerned that Town Meeting membership as presently structured is too large for the current societal and cultural influences of today's busy lifestyles. This results in not enough candidates running for available seat. The Committee is further concerned that Town Meeting members could be elected by as little as 1 vote. The Committee sees this as a potential disconnect between the member elected and the voters he or she is to represent. The Bylaw Commiftee recommends this Article by a vote of 4 -0 -0. ARTICLE 23 To see if the Town will vote, pursuant to Section 2 -6 of the Reading Home Rule Charter, to declare the seats of certain Town Meeting Members to be vacant and remove certain described persons from their position as Town Meeting Members for failure to take the oath of office within 30 days following the notice of election or for failure to attend one half or more of the Town Meeting sessions during the previous year, or take any other action with respect thereto: Precinct 1 None Precinct 2 None Precinct 3 None Precinct 4 None Precinct 5 None Precinct 6 None Precinct 7 None Precinct 8 None Board of Selectmen Background: The Reading Home Rule Charter provides for the removal by Town Meeting of Town Meeting Members who did not attend at least half of the.Town Meeting sessions during the previous year. Since all Town Meeting members had to run for re- election in 2012 because of the re- precincting related to the 2010 Federal census, there are no incumbent Town Meeting members and therefore no action to be taken under this article. Therefore this article will be indefinitely postponed. Finance Committee Report: No report. Bylaw Committee Report: No report. April 23, 2012 Annual Town Meeting 31 Report on the Warrant and you are directed to serve this Warrant by posting an attested copy thereof in at least one (1) public place in each precinct of the Town not less than fourteen (14) days prior to April 23 , 2012, or providing in a manner such as electronic submission, holding for pickup or mailing, an attested copy of said Warrant to each Town Meeting Member. Hereof fail not and make due return of this Warrant with your doings thereon to.the Town Clerk at or before the time appointed for said meeting. Given under our hands this Zg`h day of February 2012. d' lt/ A &t Alan Ulrich, Constable 32 Richard W. Schubert James Bonazoli SELECTMEN OF READING W W FY -2012 FY -2013 517,000 - 12,000 158,000 10,000 - - 36,000 - 311,700 75,000 818,000 FY -2014 FY-2015 FY -2016 FY -2017 FY -2018 FY -2019 FY -2020 FY -2021 FY -2022 FY13.22 Summary Schools - General 50,000 - - 75,000 - - 75,000 - - 75,000 742,000 Buildings - Schools (non Energy) 73,000 118,000 501,000 526,000 154,000 63,000 1,504,000 685,000 - - 3,551,000 Buildings - Schools (Energy) 74,000 12,000 - 42,000 158,000 - 15,000 25,000 26,000 60,000 350,000 Buildings - Muni (non Energy) 167,000 60,000 40,000 - 327,000 469,000 202,000 - 280,000 - - - 1,536,000 Buildings - Muni (Energy) 65,000 10,000 65,000 20,000 20,000 15,000 - - - 135,000 275,000 Finance - 60,000 60,000 - - - - 75,000 75,000 - 270,000 Library - - 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 80,000 Public Safety - Fire 14,000 155,000 69,000 654,000 316,500 90,600 180,000 849,000 339,000 - 2,689,100 Public Safety - Police 10,000 35,000 - - 20,000 - 45,000 - - 400,000 500,000 Public Works - Equipment 189,000 72,800 258,100 238,600 412,700 734,500 413,700 570,200 344,600 343,700 3,700,600 Public Works - Parks 8 Cemetery 45,000 848,000 465,000 335,600 192,000 560,600 320,000 450,800 1,295,000 428,000 4,970,000 Public Works - Roads 875,500 832,000 741,000 675,000 725,000 775,000 825,000 875,000 1 925,000 1 975,000 8,166,000 TOTAL CAPITAL REQUESTS 1,562,500 1,937,100 2,202,800 2,209,100 2,903,200 2,477,200 2,450,700 3,667,700 3,540,000 3,014,600 2,426,700 26,829,700 FINCOM policy: debt +capital 3,533,287 3,688,427 300,000 2,279,765 3,792,125 3,886,928 3,984,101 4,083,704 4,185,796 4,290,441 4,3973702 43507645 4,620,336 41,437,207 ,Allowance for energy savings 300,000 275,000 250,000 225,000 200,000 175,000 150,000 125,000 100,000 75,000 1,875,000 - -Net Included Debt 2,807,632 2,050,527 2,298,895 2,102,159 2,014,261 1,905,576 1,236,844 888,675 854,094 824,319 16,455,115 FINCOM Target Capital Funding 1,025,655 1,7083662 2,016,598 1,838,034 2,106,942 2,269,443 2,455,220 332033596 33634,027 3,753,551 3,871,017 26,857,092 Original Funding Voted or Proposed 946,000 1,569,700 368,000 - 1 1,937,700 1,945,800 1,800,000 2,050,000 2,200,000 2,400,000 3,150,000 3,600,000 3,700,000 3,800,000 26,215,500 Additional Funding Voted 139,500 - Additional Funding Proposed 4011 331,000 257,000 116,000 7410000 Additional Funding Proposed 144,000 TOTAL CAPITAL REQUESTS 1,562,500 1 2,202,800 2,209,100 2,903,200 2,477,200 2,450,700 3,667,700 3,540,000 3,014,600 2,426,700 2638293700 Annual Surplus (Deficit) - - - (293,100) (853,200) (277,200) (50,700) (511,700) 60,000 685,400 1,373,300 Cumulative Surplus (Deficit) - 1 (293,100) (1,146,300) (1,423,500) (1,474,200) (1,991,900) (1,931,900) (1,2463500) 126,800 Sources 1,319,700 General Fund 1,745,800 1,650,000 1,950,000 2,200,000 2,400,000 3,150,000 3,600,000 3,700,000 3,800,000 25,515,500 - Beg. Balance 704,822 250,000 454,822 454,822 254,822 104,821 4,822 Sale of R1E Fund P3341,"20020 200,000 150,000 100,000 End balance 254,822 104,822 4,822 Beg. Balance 678,000 368,000 150,000 200,000 260,000 260,000 153,000 187,000 350k initial each from Downtown B Gateway Smart Growth Districts 40R Stablization Funds 40R 257,000 116,000 +deposits 309,000 150,000 150,000 159k( Downtown) +150kyr(Gateway) and payments - in progress - transfer to AHTF End balance 678,000 153,000 187,000 W FY -2012 FY -2013 FY -2014 FY -2015 FY -2016 FY -2017 FY -2018 FY -2019 FY -tFY-2021 FY -2022 FY13.22 Schools - General 50,000 517,000 - 75,000 - 75,000 75,000 742,000 Building Study 50,000 400,000 75,000 42,000 ModularClassrooms 400,000 Killam Renovation (NEW- TBA) Debt Excl Debt Excl Debt Excl Debt EAcI Debt Excl Debt Excl De Debt Excl Technology -large scale projects 4OR 75,000 75,000 75,000 300,000 Vehicles;4999 Chevy pickup 1 1 1 1 1 1 42,000 Buildings - Schools (Total) 147,000 12,000 130,000 501,000 568,000 312,000 63,000 1,519,000 710,000 26,000 60,000 3,901,000 Buildings - Schools (Energy) 74,000 12,000 12,000 42,000 158,000 15,000 25,000 26,000 60,000 350,000 Buildings - Schools (non Energy) 73,000 118,000 501,000 526,000 154,000 63,000 1,504,000 685,000 3,551,000 Energy (Performance Contracdng) Sch - 12,000 - - - - - - - - - Electrical Systems Sch 50,000 - - - - - - - - 20,000 20,000 HVACIEnergy Mgmt Systems Sch - 12,000 - 22,000 158,000 - 15,000 25,000 26,000 - 270,000 Windows 8 Doors Sch 24,000 - - 20,000 - - - - - - 20,000 Generators Sch - - - - - - - - - - Technology Infrastructure Sch - - - - - - - - - - Water Heater Sch - - - - - - - - - 40,000 40,000 ADA Compliance Sch - - - - - - - - - - - Ceilings Sch - - - - - - - - - - Classroom Furniture Sch - - - - - 14,000 - - - - 14,000 Compressors Sch - - - - - - - - - - - Fire Alarms Sch - - - - - - - - - - Cafeteria Equip. 8 Fumiture Sch - 18,000 - - - - - - - - 18,000 Plumbing Sch - - - - - - - - - - CapetlFlooring Sch 48,000 90,000 109,000 134,000 104,000 49,000 - - - 486,000 Roofing Sch - - 392,000 392,000 - - 1,504,000 685,000 - - 2,973,000 Security System Sch - - - - - - - - - - - Fire Supression System Sch P25.000 - - - - - - - - - Other Sch 10,000 - - 1 50,000 - I - - - - 60,000 CJ CJ7 FY -2013 168,000 FY -2014 FY -2015 FY-2016 FY -2017 FY -2018 FY -2019 FY -2020 FY -2021 FY -2022 FYI 3-22 Buildings - Municipal 70,000 105,000 347,000 489,000 217,000 280,000 135,000 1,811,000 Buildings - Muni (Energy) 10,000 158,000 10,000 65,000 20,000 20,000 15,000 - - 135,000 275,000 Buildings - Muni (non Energy) P232,000 60,000 40,000 327,000 469,000 202,000 280,000 - - 1,536,000 Energy (Performance Contracting) - 10,000 - - - - - - - - 58,000 - - 100,000 Electrical Systems Mun - - - HVACIEnergy Mgml Systems Mun - 35,000 20,000 20,000 15,000 - - - - 90,000 Windows & Doors Mun 45,000 10,000 - - - - - - - - 20,000 Generator Mun - - 30,000 - - - - - - 120,000 150,000 Technology Infrastructure Mun - - - - - - - - - - - Water Heater Mun - - - - - - - - - 15,000 15,000 ADA Compliance Mun - - - - - - - - - - Ceiling Mun - - 10,000 - - - - - - - 10,000 Furniture Mun - - - - - - - - - - Compressor Mun - - - - - - - - - - Fire Alan Mun 40,000 - - - - - - - - - KitchenlCafeteda Mun - - - - - - - - - - Plumbing Mun - - - - - - - - - - - CapetlFlooring Mun 30,000 10,000 30,000 Roofing Mun - - - 327,000 469,000 202,000 280,000 - - - 1,278,000 Security System Mun 85,000 - - - - - - - - - - Fire Supression System Mun - - - - - - - - - - - Other (DPW design'l3,'14) Mun 12,000 1 50,000 - - - 150,000 W T FY -2012 FY -2013 - FY -2014 FY -2015 FY -2016 FY -2017 FY -2018. FY -2019 FY -2020 FY -2021 FY-2022 FYI 3-22 Finance 60,000 60,000 - - 75,000 75,000 270,000 Technology - large scale projects 60,000 60,000 75,000 75,000 270,000 Library - 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 80,000 Furnishings & Shelving ($20ktyr- hold for renovation decision) - Circulation System ($100k -hold for renovation derision) - Equipment 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 80,000 Renovation ($12mil project -NEW) Debt Excl Debt Excl Debt Excl Debt Excl Debt Excl Debt Excl Debt Excl Debt Excl Debt Excl - PublicSafcty - Fire 14,000 36,000 155,000 69,000 654,000 316,500 90,600 180,000 849,000 339,000 - 2,689,100 Pumper Eng #1(2010- $525k; next FY30) Debt Debt Debt Debt 36,000 Debt Debt Pumper Eng #2(2007- $410k; next FY25) Debt - - Pumper Eng #3(1995: es1$630k FY16) 630,000 630,000 Pumper Eng #4(2001: est $804k FY20) 804,000 804,000 Ladder Trk #1(2008: $800k, next FY27) Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt - Ambulance #1(2010 -10 yrs) 294,000 294,000 Ambulance #2 (2006 - 10yrs) 275,000 275,000 Passenger Car#1 (2005 -10yrs) 41,500 41,500 Passenger Car#2 (1997 -10yrs) 45,000 45,000 Pickup Truck #3 (2006 -12yrs) 45,600 45,600 Pickup Truck #4 (1996 -12yrs) 36,000 Alarm Truck (1994 - 16yrs) 69,000 69,000 ALS Defibrillator (2006 - 5yrs) 24,000 24,000 Rescue Tool(2006 -12yrs) 45,000 45,000 Breathing Air Bottles 14,000 Thermal Imaging (2010 -10yrs) 45,000 - 45,000 Fire Hose - 25,000 30,000 55,000 Turnout Gear (2008 - 5yrs) 130,000 150,000 280,000 Public Safety - Police/Dispatch 10,000 35,000 20,000 45,000 - 400,000 500,000 Handguns & Associated Leather (Police) 10,000 10,000 Vehicle Video Integration 35,000 35,000 70,000 Radios (Police & Fire 2010 -12yrs) 400,000 400,000 Dispatch local share 10,000 AEDs . 20,000 20,000 W J FY -2012 FY -2013 311,700 FY -2014 F.Y -2015 FY -2016 FY -2017 FY -2018 FY -2019 FY -2020 FY -2021 FY -2022 FY13 -22 Public Works - Equipment 189,000 72,800 258,100 238,600 412,700 734,500 413,700 570,200 344,600 343,700 3,700,600 Large Trucks Life 63,000 115,000 64,000 60,000 220,000 123,000 72,000 140,000 136,000 993,000 Truck #4 - Sander (2001) 15 63,000 . 123,000 123,000 Truck #8 - 10 wheeler (2000) 15 220,000 220,000 Truck #9 - Sander (2004) 15 136,000 136,000 Truck #19 - Sander (1987) 15 140,000 140,000 Dump Truck C2 (1996) 10 63,000 Dump Truck C3.(1999) 10 60,000 60,000 Truck #10 (1996) 15 115,000 115,000 Dump truck #12 Parks (1997) 15 64,000 64,000 Dump truck #24 Parks (2000) 15 72,000 72,000 Pick- upslCarsNans 119,000 - 35,000 46,000 77,200 36,500 39,500 133,700 45,000 50,000 45,000 507,900 Pickup Ford U61ity 411 (1989) 10 35,000 35,000 Pickup Chevy #9 Parks (1986) 10 37,000 - Pickup Ford Utility #C1 (1997) 10 46,000 46,000 Pickup Ford #2 Parks (1997) 10 46,000 46,000 Pickup Chevy Utility #1 (2008) 10 85,000 85,000 Pickup Ford Utility #4 (1997) 10 50,000 50,000 Pickup Ford Utility #7 (1997) 10 50,000 - HV3 Ford Van (1995) 10 36,500 36,500 HV4 Ford Van (1995) 10 39,500 39,500 HV5 Ford Van COA (2003) 10 48,700 48,700 Survey #1 Ford Explorer (2000) 10 32,000 - Car#2 Ford Sedan (2007) 10 45,000 45,000 Car#3 Ford Escape HYBRID (2008) 10 45,000 45,000 Cam. #4 Ford Sedan (1993) 10 31,200 31,200 BackhoeslLoaderslHeavy Equipment 70,000 - 32,400 200,000 96,000 180,000 508,400 Backhoe Loader (Cem.) (2008) 10 96,000 96,000 Loader JD #624G (2007) 10 200,000 200,000 Loader Cat #928F (1994) 10 180,000 180,000 Bobcat Loader 743 (1987) 10 32,400 32,400 CAT Bulldozer 951 (1971) 70,000 Specialty Equipment - Heary Duty - 183,700 255,000 217,000 - 145,000 111,000 911,700 Tractor Ford 445 (Parks) 15 48,700 48,700 Roller- Ferguson 46A (1988) 15 82,000 82 ,000 Screener(1994) 15 135,000 135,000 FY - 2013 135,000 FY -2014 FY -2015 FY -2016 FY -2017 FY -2018 FY -2019 FY -2020 FY -2021 FY -2022 FY13.22 Pavement Leeboy Sprd (1998) 10 130,000 130,000 Sidewalk Snow Plow #3(2008) 10 111,000 111,000 Snow Plow (1995) 10 LFY-2012 135,000 Snow Plow #2 C9700 (1997) 10 145,000 145,000 Snow- Bombardier #1 (1993) 10 125,000 125,000 Specialty Equipment • Light Duty 28,000 37,800 26,800 30,000 43,000 - 39,500 42,000 46,000 43,600 66,500 403,200 HW Comp2 INT Compr(1996) 10 _ 283000 26,800. 26,800 300L Lebot (Roller) (1998) 10 21,000 21,000 Eager Beaver Trailer (1985) 15 37,800 37,800 1CH Woodsman Chipper (2004) 10 66,500 66,500 1GV Leaf Vac(1999) 10 39,500 39,500 2CH Mobark(1989) 10 46,000 46,000 2GV Leaf Vac (2000) 10 43,600 43,600 SmithCo 60 Leaf Vac (1999) 10 42,000 423000 Toro 48" LeafVac (1993) 10 28,000 FMC Track Mount Sprayer 500gal 30,000 30,000 SmBhCo 13 -550 Infield (1994) 7 22,000 22,000 Lawnmowers - 17,000 70,300 35,000 18,200 18,500 19,000 82,200 356,400 Mower (Cem.) SKAG 72" (1998) 4 - 17,000 - 17,500 M.963200 . 17,500 Mower (Cem.) SKAG 61' (1999) 4 18,200 18,200 Mower (Parks) TORO Gang (1996) 8 70,300 166,500 Mower (Cem.) SKAG 52" (1995) 4 19,000 36,000 Mower (Parks) SKAG 52'(1998) 4 17,500 17,500 Mower -TORO Gang (2008) 6 1 82,200 82,200 912F #2 John Deere Mower (1989) 7 - 18,500 18,500 Engineering EquipmentlServices - 203000 - - - - 20,000 Survey Equipment 20,000 20,000 DPW: Other & Parks/Recr'tn 45,000 75,000 848,000 4653000 335,600 192,000 560,600 320,000 450,800 1,295,000 428,000 4,970,000 Public Works - Grounds - 30,000 50,000 20,000 50,000 20,000 50,000 20,000 50,000 20,000 - 310,000 Fence Replacement 30,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 110,000 Parking Lot Pavement 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 250,000 Cold storage building - design $50k (in Town Facilities FY14) - Cold storage building - $1.5mil (debt FY15 -19) Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt - PublicWorks - Cemetery I I . - - Gem garage - design $100k (in Town Facilities FY13) Cem garage - $1.5mil(debt FY14 -18) Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt !�7 FY -2013 45,000 FY -2014 FY -2015 FY -2016 FY -2017 FY -2019 FY -2020 FY -2021 FY -2022 FY13.22 Public Works - Recreation 798,000 445,000 285,600 172,000 0,600 300,000 400,800 1,275,000 428,000 4,660,000 Tennis Courts- Bancroft Ave. $485k Debt Debt 7FY-2018 Artificial Tud @Parker MS $736k VDebt 150,000 150,000 Coolidge MS field upgrade (artificial turf)) 400,000 400,000 Reconstruct Playgrounds Program 45,000 Sturges 45,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 290,000 Hunt Pk Wood End up Wood End do B Meadow Barrows Wash Pk Killam Josh Eaton Sturges - Birch Meadow Complex = $2.188 tall 500,000 20,000 230,000 110,000 150,000 1,100,000 78,000 2,188,000 (also school playground in FY17) Pavilion bating cage BB &mulli-P Win bkstp softball light field &path st. & lot - - courts dug+blchrs backstops - Playground (Imagination Station) Washington Park $586k 129,000 tennis ct 233,000 backstop 100,000 paths 462,000 (also playground in FY10 &FY19) 124,000 bsklball ct &shift field 124,000 Symonds Way $50k 50,000 backstop 50,000 Hunt Park $125k 125,000 125,000 (also playground in FY14) backstop Sturges Park $180.8k 63,800 tennis d 63,800 (also playground in FY13 &FY22) 80,000 baskethll ct - 80,000 37,000 backstop 37,000 Kilian $30.6k 30,600 backstop 30,600 (also playground in FY11 &FY20) Joshua Eaton $37k 37,000 backstop 37,000 (also playground in FY12 &FY21) Barrows $297.6k 124,500 tennis ct 95,000 backstop 219,500 (also playground in FY09 &FY18) 78,100 basMball ct & infield 78,100 Wood End $325k 325,000 325,000 (also playgrounds in FY15 & FY16) field CD FY -2012 FY -2013 25,000 63,000 50,000 Debt 450,000 230,000 FY -2014 FY -2015 FY -2016 FY -2017 FY -2016 FY -2019 FY -2020 FY -2021 FY -2022 FY13.22 Public Works - Roads SldewalklCurblPed. Safety 25,000 25,000 25,000 50,000 50,000 50,000. 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 425,000 Additional Curb /Sidewalk 40R 25,000 50,000 50,000 163,000 Additional Curb/Sidewalk 14,000 Skim Coating & Crack Seal Patch 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 500,000 Downtown Improve ($650k 10yr bond) Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt West Street design ($155k) 55,500 99,500 99,500 West Street - Local share ($480k) 240,000 240,000 480,000 General Fund - various roads 400,000 500,000 450,500 335,000 385,000 675,000 725,000 775,000 825.000 875,000 5,995,500 Additonal Street projects 40R 306,000 207,000 66,000 503,000 TOTAL GENERAL FUND VOTED 875,500 818,000 832,000 741,000 675,000 725,000 775,000 825,000 875,000 925,000 975,000 8,166,000 Grants - various roads 597,663 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 6,000,000 Grants - West Street - 7,500,000 1 7,500,000 TOTAL ROAD CAPITAL 1,473,163 1,418,000 1,432,000 8,841,000 1,275,000 1,325,000 1,375,000 1,425,000 .1,475,000 1,525,000 1,575,000 21,666,000 Funding Sources Summary 475,000 525,000 293,000 600,000 'General Fund Budget - various roads 575,000 625,000 675,000 725,000 775,000 825,000 875,000 925,000 975,000 7,500,000 Additional Funding Voted 55,500 - Additional Funding Proposed 40R 331,000 257,000 116,000 666,000 Chapter 90 Grants - various roads 597,663 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 6,000,000 Grants - specific roads 7,500,000 7,500,000 TOTAL ROAD BUDGET 1,459,163 1,418,000 1,432,000 8,841,000 1,275,000 1,325,000 1,375,000 1,425,000 1,475,000 1,525,000 1,575,000 21,666,000 373,972 525,000 Note: previous pace (over -ride) 364,851 383,321 392,904 402,727 412,795 423,115 433,693 444,535 455,648 4673040 4,189,749 New schedule 475,000 575,000 625,000 675,000 725,000 775,000 825,000 875,000 925,000 975,000 7,500,000 Increase 110,149 151,028 40 °h 191,679 232,096 272,273 312,205 351,885 391,307 430,465 469,352 5073960 3,310,251 30% 50% 59% 68% 76% 83% 90% 97%1 103% 109% 79% 4� Town of Reading I Approved Requeste Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Debt Service Schedule FY -2012 1 FY -2013 1 FY -2014 FY -2015 FY -2016 FY -2017 FY -2018 FY -2019 FY -2020 FY -2021 FY -2022 FY -2023 FY -2024 FY -2025 41311 $ s I $ t S $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ General Fund: .6,037,284 4,539,575 4,38D,600- 3,775,030' "3,555,757. 3,445,159 3,327;574 2,658;391 - 2,307,273; 2 ,257,231' - 2,209,994'2,060,030 2,037,611. -' ":-336;188 Principal 4,185,000 3,535000 3,310,000 2,735,000 2,630,000 2,645,000 2,655,000 2,110,000 1,860,000 1,895,000 1,935,000 1,875,000 1,940,000 330,000 Within Levy Limit 2,570,000 1,870,000 1,585,000 1,795,000 1,675,000 1,665,000 1,635,000 1,040,000 740,000 735,000 735,000 635,000 635,000 330,000 Debt Exclusion 1,615,000 1,665,000 1,725,000 940,000 955,000 980,000 1,020,000 1,070,000 1,120,000 1,160,000 1,200,000 1,240,000 1,305,000 0 Interest 1,852,284 1,004,575 1,070,600 1,040,030 925,757 800,159 672,574 548,391 447,273 362,231 274,994 185,030 97,611 6,188 Within Levy Limit 613,506 409,765 465,527 503,895 427,159 349,261 270,576 196,844 148,675 119,094 89,319 58,825 32,881 6,188 Debt Exclusion 1,178,778 594,810 605,073 536,136 498,598 450,898 401,998 351,548 298,598 243,138 185,675 126,205 64,730 0 Total Within Levy Limit: 3,243,506 2,279765 12,050,527 2,298,895 2,102,159 2,014,261 1,905,576 1,236,844 888,675 854,094 824,319 693,825 667,881 336,188 Issued 3,243506 2,279,765 1,653,027 1,523,395 1,365,659 1,316,761 1,247,076 917,344 888,675 854,094 824,319 693,825 667,881 336,188 Approved not issued 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Not approved '0 0 397,500 775,500 736,500 697,500 658,500 319,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 MSBA share Coolid a 462,036 0 0 0 Net Included Debt 2,781,470 12,279,765 2,050527 2,298,895 2,102,159 2,014,261 1905,576 1236,844 888,675 854,094 824,319 693,825 667,881 336,188 "Refin8ndin chade-.=''26d63`.- 115303.4111650,:''161394'144,088 "117,582'm "96125 � (75,069) (53,813-.' -31557 .'458,700 - ``- 0 -' - "0 -'�`�" 0` Total Debt Exclusion: 12,793,778 2,259,810 2,330,073 1,476,136 1,453,598 1,430,898 1,421,998 1,421,548 1,418,598 1,403,138 1,385,675 1,366,205 1,369,730 0 Issued 2,793,778 2,259,810 2,330,073 1,476,136 1,453,598 1,430,898 1,421,998 1,421,548 1,418,598 1,403,138 1,385,675 1,366,205 1,369,730 0 MSBA: esl. 722,014 215,828 817,305 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Net Excluded Debt 12,071,764 12,043,982 11,512,768 1,476136 1453,598 1430,898 1421,998 1,421,548 1418,598 1403138 1,385,675 1,366,205 1,369730 0 ".. Refinancin than e.. -; "e` .0 _ : 2,006" 499005 = 498 "930 d- (467,746),": 438598 '. 404,850 , (366j255),'. (327,026), '(293,622) ; (240,404) ". (197,121) _ -143134 r ; =' 0 Debt Summary (net of MSBA relmbursementsl 3,563,295 3,775,030 3,555,757 3,445,159 3,327,574 2,658,391 2,307,273 2,257,231 2,209,994 2,060,030 2,037,611 336,188 Net Included +Excluded 4,853,234 4,323,747 School Buildings 3,126,209 2,907,384 2,294,590 2,145,003 2,086,816 2,033,499 1,976,166 1,810,229 1,794,079 1,764,844 1,733,538 1,699,918 1,689,255 0 Town Buildings 420,000 0 397,500 775,500. 736,500 697,500 658,500 319,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 Energy /Green Repair 467,850 1 598,375 595,050 585,350 574,231 561,275 545,388 528,663 "513,194 492,388 476,456 360,113 348,356 336,188 4,014,059 3505759 3,287,140 3,505,853 3,397,548 3,292,274 3,180,054 2,658,391 2,307,273 2,257,231 2,209,994 2,060,030 2,037,611 336,188 Recreation 178,565 172,855 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Equipment 292,710 285,170 199,130 194,590 86,100 83,660 81,220 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Roads 81,900 79,463 77,025 74,588 72,109 69,225. 66,300 0 _ 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 Technology 286,000 280,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 839,175 817,988 276,155 269,178 158,209 152,885 147,520 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Excluded outside of Prop 2 -112 Debt Summer Current: RMHS, Wd End 8 Barroml 2,043,982 1,512,768 1,476,136 1,453,598 1,430,898 1,421,998 1,421,548 1,418,598 1,403,138 1,385,675 1,366,205 1,369,730 Current: per $400k SF home 219 162 158 156 153 152 152 152 150 148 146 147 Estimate for Library- local share$7milor$12mil 970,049 970,049 970,049 970,049 970,049 970,049 970,049 970,049 970,049 970,049 LIBRARY per $400k SF home 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 ,. Estimate for Killam- local sham$3mil of$5mil 415,735 415,735 415,735 415,735 415,735 415,735 415,735 415,735 415,735 415,735 Killam per $400k SF home 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 J49 36,890,412 (1,104,660) (380,580) (380,580) 0 (724,080) (196,759) (527,321) 0 (577,339) (444,197) (133,143) 0 (462,036) (115,303) (450,081) (115,303) (527,321) (527,321) (529,327) 2,006 (3,861,685) 2,006 0 (113,297) (118,780). 0 5,483 (113,297) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,006 0 0 0 0 0 N Tom of Reading I Debt Service Schedule I 4/31122:36 PM Principal + Interest Approved FY -2012 1 $ Requested FY -2013 $ Projected FY -2014 $ Projected FY -2015 $ Projected FY -2016 $ Projected FY -2017 $ Projected FY -2018 $ Projected FY -2019 $ Projected FY -2020 $ Projected FY -2021 $ Projected FY -2022 $ Projected FY -2023 $ Projected FY -2024 $ Projected FY -2025 $ WRhihL -e vLlrfiC .3,243,506= 2,279765 2. 050,527; 2298,895 - .2102159'2014,261 `1905,576 1,236,844 - 888,675' •854,094 824,319 '693,825 667881': 336,188 Issued 3,243,506 2,279,765 1,653,027 1,523,395 1,365,659 1,316,761 1,247,076 917,344 888,675 854,094 824,319 693,825 667,881 336,188 Approved not issued 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 Not approved 0 0 397,500 775,500 736,500 697,500 656,500 319,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 remium RMHS 15,595 13,300 12,600 11,800 10,800 9,700 8,800 7,800 6,800 5,500 4,200 2,800 1,500 0 Energy Improvements 466,450 459,750 453,050 446,350 439,231 431,275 420,388 408,663 398,194 382,388 371,456 360,113 348,356 336,188 Killam Green Repair 938 92,879 95,140 93,130 90,450 87,100 83,750 80,400 77,050 73,700 70,350 0 0 0 Birch Mdw Green Repair 462 45,747 46,860 45,870 44,550 42,900 41,250 39,600 37,950 36,300 34,650 0 0 0 Barrows[Wd End $522k 45,900 44,775 43,650 42,525 - 41,400 39,900 38,400 37,200 36,000 34,800 33,600 32,400 31,200 0 Wood End 230,663 225,263 219,713 212,963 2063213 199,463 193,463 187,463 181,463 175,313 169,125 1623825 156,450 0 Barrows 197,584 192,904 .183,094 177,469 171,844 166,219 161,219 156,219 151,219 146,094 140,938 135,688 130,375 0 Coolid e® 711,250 104,678 77,450 5,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Parker® 258,125 246,491 230,086 218,910 202,963 187,320 152,288 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Joshua Eaton® 41,830 25,839 15,229 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Birch Meadow@ 15,534 10153 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Parker Turl $375k 79,219 76,406 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tennis Courts $485k 99,346 96,449 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Downtown Im $650k 81,900 79,463 77,025 74,588 72,109 69,225 66,300 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Police Station 420,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ladder truck $800k 95,860 93,420 90,980 88,540 86,100 83,660 81,220 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pumper En #2 $410k 84,500 81,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Financials $1.1 mil 286,000 280,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pumper En #1 $525k 112,350 110,250 108,150 106,050 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Corn. Garage $1.5m 0 0 1 397,500 378,000 358,500 339,000 319,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cold Storage $1.5m 0 0 1 0 397,500 378,000 358,500 339,000 319,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0. ' DebtEzclusion -��- 2,793778 -: :2,259,810 2330,073'•4476;136 1,453,598 1430, 898;1, 421, 996; - 1;421;548° 1,418598 },1403138 1'385675.1366205 1369730 _ _. BarrowslWd End $787k 68,850 67,163 65,475 63,788 62,100 59,850 57,600 55,800 54,000 52,200 50,400 48,600 46,800 0 RMHS® 12,709,550 12,177,629 12,249,950 1,398,150 1,377,750 1,357,750 1,351,500 1,353,250 1,352,500 1,339,250 1,324,000 1,306,750 1,312,500 0 Wood End 1 15,378 15,018 1 14,648 14,198 13,748 13,298 12,898 12,498 12,098 11,688 11,275 10,855 10,430 0 REFI (396,840) 994,625 1,997,283 (1,002,658) (13,300) 4,864 222,914 (366,871) (290,175) (79,053) 225,263 (1,849,071) (2,908,186) (724,397) (2,488,092) (461,803) (56,736) 51,674 (145,800) (687,500) (153,071) 55,661 270,348 110,250 0 0 0 2,259,810 67,163 2,177,629 15,018 (76,406) W Town of Reading Debt Service Schedule 4131122:36 PM Principal Approved FY -2012 Requested FY -2013 Projected FY -2014 $ Projected FY .2015 $ Projected FY -2016 $ Projected FY -2017 $ Projected FY -2018 $ Projected FY -2019 $ Projected FY -2020 $ Projected FY -2021 $ Projected FY -2022 $ Projected FY -2023 $ Projected FY -2024 $ Projected FY -2025 $ $ $ F- Within Lev Limit7- - 2570,000 1,870,000 9385;000-1;795, 000 "1; 675000- 1;66500V,635000+ "1`,040000 740000�]�,735,000k. 735000.,_" 635000 -'635000-:=-330000 - Issued 2,570,000 1,870,000 1,285,000 1,195,000 1,075,000 1,065,000 1,035,000 740,000 740,000 735,000 735,000 635,000 635,000 330,000 A roved not issued Not approved 0 0 300,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 300,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 remium RMHS Energy Improvements 335,000 335,000 335,000 335,000 335,000 335,000 335,000 335,000 335,000 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000 Killam Green Repair 67,000 67,000 67,000 67,000 67,000 67,000 67,000 67,000 67,000 67,000 Birch Mdw Green Repair 33,000 33,000 33,000 33,000 33,000 33,000 33,000 33,000 33,000 33,000 BanowsAWd End $522k 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000. 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 Wood End 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000. 150,000 Barrows 130,000 130,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 Coolid e® 475,000 100,000 75,000 5,000 Parker® 220,000 215,000 205,000 200,000 190,000 180,000 150,000 - Joshua Eaton® 40,000 1 25,000 15,000 Birch Meadow® 15,000 1 10,000 Parker Turf $3751 75,000 1 75,000 Tennis Courts $485k 95,000 95,000 Downtown m " Police Station 400,000 Ladder tack $8001 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 Pumper En #2 $410k 80,000 80,000 Financials s $1.1 mil 275,000 275,000 Pumper En #1 $525k 105,000 105,000 105,000 105,000 Cem. Garage $1.5m 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 Cold Storage $1.5m 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 TW -0 Debt Exdl6slon'- 1;615000 1,665000'1, 725, 000 940,000'955000,. - 980,0001 {020000 - 1070000-1'120,000!1,160000 -1;200000`-1240000'1,305000. - BarrowsNWd End $787k 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 RMHS® 11,560,000 11,610,000 11,670,000 885,000 900,000 925,000 965,000 1,015,000 1,065,000 1,105,000 1,145,000 1,185,000 1,250,000 Wood End 1 10,000 1 10,000 1 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 REFI (96,449) 1,790,537 1,870,000 0 (93,420) (81,500) 54,500 (43,250) 33,000 30,000 150,000 (2,657,131) 32,838 (2,489,950) 9,982 10,000 45,000 (55,000) (65,000) (215.000) 55,000 70,000 275,000 105,000 0 0 0 1,665,000 45,000 1,610,000 (65,000) A Town of Reading Debt Service Schedule 4131122:36 PM Interest Approved FY -2012 Requested FY -2013 Projected FY -2014 $ Projected FY -2015 $ Projected FY -2016 $ Projected FY -2017 $ Projected FY -2018 $ Projected FY -2019 $ Projected FY -2020 $ Projected FY -2021 $ Projected FY -2022 $ Projected FY -2023 $ Projected FY -2024 $ Projected FY -2025 $ $ $ i Within Levi Limit 613;506 409,765 "465,527 -503.895 - 427,159 .- 349,261 i270,576 .196,844 ` 148,675 119,094- 89,319 '`58,825 - :32,881 - 6,188. Issued 673,506 409,765 368,027 328,395 290,659 251,761 212,076 177,344 148,675 119,094 89,319 58,825 32,881 6,188 Approved not issued Not approved 0 0 97,500 175,500 136,500 97,500 58,500 19,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 remium RMHS 15,595 13,300 12,600 11,800 10,800 9,700 8,800 7,800 6,800 5,500 4,200 2,800 1,500 Energy Improvements 131,450 124,750 118,050 111,350 104,231 96,275 . 85,388 73,663 63,194 52,388 41,456 30,113 18,356 6,188 Killam Green Repair 938 25,879 28,140 26,130 23,450 20,100 16,750 13,400 10,050 6,700 3,350. Birch Mdw Green Repair 462 12,747 13,860 12,870 11,550 9,900 8,250 6,600 4,950 3,300 1,650 BarrowslWd End $522k 15,900 14,775 13,650 12,525 11,400 9,900 8,400 7,200 6,000 4,800 3,600 2,400 1,200 Wood End 80,663 75,263 69,713 62,963 56,213 49,463 43,463 37,463 31,463 25,313 19,125 12,825 6,450 Barrows 67,584 62,904 58,094 52,469 46,844 41,219 36,219 31,219 26,219 21,094 15,938 10,688 5,375 Coolid e® 0 4,678 2,450 200 - Parke@ 5 31,491 25,086 18,910 12,963 7,320 2,288 Joshua Eaton® 0 839 229 Birch Meadow@ 4 153 Parker Turf $375k 9 1,406 Tennis Courts $485k 6 1,449 Downtown lm $650k 0 R20,000 14,463 12,025 9,588 7,109 4,225 1,300 Police Station 0 Ladder truck $800k 0 13,420 10,980 8,540 6,100 3,660 1,220 Pum er En 112 $410k 0 1,500 Financials s$1.1 mil 0 5,500 Pum er En ili $525k 50 5,250 3,150 1,050 Cem. Garage $1.5m 97,500 78,000 58,500 39,000 19,500 Cold Store a $1:5m 97,500 78,000 58,500 39,000 19,500 Debt Eiclosion . 1,178,778 594,810 1-605,073-,-536,136-,' 498;598, *.450;898 - 401998 351548 298598;'243,138 185,675 126,205 64730 - 0 Barrows/Wd End $787k 23,850 22,163 20,475 18,788 17,100 14,850 12,600 10,800 9,000 7,200 5,400 3,600 1,800 RMHSO 1,149,550 567,629 579,950 513,150 477,750 432,750 386,500 338,250 287,500 234,250 179,000 121,750 62,500 Wood End 5,378 5,018 4,648 4,198 3,748 3,298 2,898 2,498 2,098 1,688 1,275 855 430 REFI (95,000) 344,765 409,765 0 (80,000) (66,700) (150,250) (79,121) 12,747 14,775 75,263 (1,602,096) (40,322) (1,578,509) (9,161) 153 (73,857) (61,455) (198,037) (839) 13,268 1,500 5,500 5,250 0 0 0 594,810 22,163 566,223 3,569 to Town of Reading Approved Requested Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Debi Service Schedule FY -2012 FY -2013 1 FY -2014 FY -2015 FY -2016 FY -2017 FY -2018 FY -2019 FY -2020 FY -2021 FY -2022 FY -2023 FY -2024 FY -2025 $ 4/3112 2:36 PM $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ INSIDE LEVY AFTER Coolidge debt service 711,250 104,678 77,450 5,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 187,328 MSBA paynn ents 462,036 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Net cost to Town 249,214 104,678 77,450 5,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 187,328 BEFORE' Coolidge debt service 711,250 687,500 663,750 640,000 616,250 587,500 564,000 540,500 517,000 493,500 0 0 0 0 5,310,000 MSBA payments 462,036 462,036 462,036 462,036 462,036 462,036 462,036 462,036 462,036 462,036 462,036 0 0 0 4,620,360 Net cost to Town 249,214 225,464 201,714 177,964 154,214 125,464 101,964 78,464 _ 54,964 31,464 (462,036) 0 0 0 689,640 Difference (120,786) (124,264) (172,764) (154,214) (1125,464) (101,964) V8,464) (54,964) 31,464 462,036 0 0 0 502 312 OUTSIDE LEVY - AFTER RMHS debt service 2,709,550 2,177,629 2,249,950 1,398,150 1,377,750 1,357,750 1,351,500 1,353,250 1,352,500 1,339,250 1,324,000 1,306,750 1,312,500 0 17,900,979 MSBA payments 722,014 215,828 817,305 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 1,033,133 Net cost to Town 1,987,536 1,961,801 1,432,645 1,398,150 1,377,750 1,357,750 1,351,500 1,353,250 1,352,500 1,339,250 1,324,000 1,306,750 1,312,500 0 16,867,846 BEFORE RMHS debt service 2,709,550 2,704,950 2,704,575 2,697,775 2,676,275 2,656,525 2,651,925 2,652,106' 2,651,468 2,636,469 2,621,969 2,607,719 2,610,394 0 31,872,149 MSBA payrn ents 722,014 745,155 772,925 800,695 830,779 863,177 895,575 932,601 971,942 1,013,596 1,057,565 1,103,848 1,154,759 0 11,142,618 Net cost to Town 1,987,536 1,959,795 1,931,650 1,897,080 1,845,496 1,793,348 1,756,350 1,719,505 1,679,526 1,622,872 1,564,404 1,503,871 1,455,634 0 20,729,531 Difference 2,006 (499,005) (498 930 (467,746) (435,598) (404,85D) 366,255 (327,026) (283,622) (240,404) 197121 143134 0 3 861 665 _ o TOTALdebt service AFTER 2,282,307 2,327,400 1,403,350 1,377,750 1,357,750 1,351,500 1,353,250 1,352,500 1,339,250 1,324,000 1,306,750 1,312,500 0 18,088,307 BEFORE 3,392,450 3,368,325 3,337,775 3,292,525 3,244,025 3,215,925 3,192,606 3,168,468 3,129,969 2,621,969 2,607,719 2,610,394 0 37,182,149 (1,1141431 (1,040,925) (1,934,425) (1,914,775) (1,886,275) (1,864,425) (1,839,356) (1,815,968) (1,790,719) (1,297,969) (1,300,969) (1,297,694) (19,093,842) TOTAL revenues AFTER 215,828 817,305 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 1,033,133 BEFORE 1,207,191 1,234,961 1,262,731 1,292,815 1,325,213 1,357,611 1,394,637 1,433,978 1,475,632 1,519,601 1,103,848 1,154,759 0 15,762,978 (991,363) (417,656) (1,262,731) (1,292,815) (1,325,213) (1,357,611) (1,394,637) (1,433,978) (1,475.632) (1,519.601) (1,103,M) (1,154,759) (14,729,845) NET Cost to Town (118,780) (623,269) (671,694) (621,960) (561,062) (506,814) (444,719) (381,990) (315,086) 221,632 (197,121) (143,134) 0 (4,363,997). W12 -A C71 04/03/2012 15:02 glapointe .FOR 2012 09. TOWN OF READING. Mrs ITOWN OF READING FY2012 TOWN SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS AND.+' - CUMMULATIVE TOWN GRANT ACTIVITY TO MARCH ORIGINAL -- TRANFRS/ REVISED - APPROP. "':'( -: ADJSTMTS 'BUDGET YTD EXPENDED 0010.FEDERAL GRANTS =- 73,358. :- 17,297.27 ". 100. ° "56,.060.33 2010 FGRT:TEENS'AND TWEENS 12,021 SGRT.GARAGE 'FEASIBILITY r00 12,021.24 . 2020 FGRT GHSD'UNDERAGE ALCOHOL. - '19,946 -24275 3030- 19,920:75 . 2030 FGRT -FEMA- ASSIST TO FIREFI 223,763 32,296..00 9,428.49, - 256,059..22 3040 2040.7FGRT.FEMA THRU MEMA - - '7,000' 7;000:00 : -. 34',523-:78 =- 14,000:00 21,554.48 2060 CITIZEN CORP(FEMA) 270. 7;792 :00 -- 270.00 - - -. -- 7,792.00. 2070 LSTA GREEN: LIBRARY 'GRANT_ '' 0 :7,500.00 _ DHCD 40.R APPLICATION '- .7,500x.00 '- -940. 2090: FEDERAL.HWY SAFETY GRANT 20,490 41346 -.20 24,836.02 ': MASS TECH COLL- WASTETOEN 2100FGRT- SECURE.SCHOOLS(COPS) '22,675 -- 2;057:08 - -.00 - :.20;61751. 2110 - FEDERAL - -- GRANT -- VESTS 5. 12,718 3,.200.00 15, 917-50 .00 2120 FED GRT- .RCASA .:, __ ,355,859 100;000..00 241, 455;859_42 .00 2130 -. FGRT. FOR MASS HISTORICAL G S 1 0 12,000.00 3110. "12,000:00 2,828•- 2150. FGRT -BARE MEADOW.'TRAIL- 16,539 "' -3.09 853.06 :'- 16;535.91' - 2220 FGRT:FIRE OVERTIME REIMBUR - 1,748 41,029.20 15,000_00 - .42,777`.60 - TOTAL FEDERAL GRANTS ':693,029. 205,286.46 °898.,315:17 0011 ARRAFEDERAL- STIMULUS GRANTS 2200 ARRAGRT SUMMER ''- YTH'EMPLMNT. .. 4,700 :00� 4,700.00 :TOTAL ARRA FEDERAL STIMULUS 'GR 4,700 = -.4,700:00 0020-STATE GRANTS 12;021 24 14,989.46 150,997.87 9,500.00 .00 7,500.06 26,296.60 20,617.51 14,765.45 409,233.26 12,000.00 16,535.91 48,892.25 743.349.61 4.700.00 4,700.00 3010 :SETH. PSAP TRAINING GRANT_ . =- 73,358. :- 17,297.27 ". 100. ° "56,.060.33 - 29,904.83 -1 4, 931.29:. 30201. SGRT.GARAGE 'FEASIBILITY 50,000.; - '. 00 '50,000:00' -- 50,000.00 %: 3030- 'MAPC" -BIKE RACK GRANT -, '9,731. - 302.50 - 67.9% i 9;428.49 9,428.49, "270.00 3040 STATE GRANT S.A.F.E. - -'- 18';336 - 16,188.00 .001 : -. 34',523-:78 -' 21,554.48 3050' SGRT' FIREFIGHTER EQUIPMENT 7;792 :00 - - -. -- 7,792.00. - 7,792.00 3060:SGRT.: _ DHCD 40.R APPLICATION -- .32,'.553 .' '- -940. 15 -.31', 612185 ', 31, 612.85 3080 ': MASS TECH COLL- WASTETOEN .14, 977-, -14 .00 :14,976..59. - -.00 7,933.00 3090'- ELDER::AFFAIRS GRANT - -' 59,599.:.., - .30,050.50 B9, 649:53,+ .00 89,649.53 3100- -SGRT" -FIRE EQUIPMENT '- 241, .00 -- '291.00 5,173 241.00 - 149,792.54,- 3110. HEALTH BOARD GRANT : - 2,828•- �.00 �.. 100 •.2,827.72 .00 853.06 3120 HEALTH RESOURCES IN ACTION - 15,000. - .00 15,000_00 - 15,000.00 ;26,155..50' 1171- HFALTB RF.SONRCFB TN ACTTON - 0 3.750.00 `.!00 :3.'750.:00 . 00 3,750.00 .'00 .00 : ". 100. 0 %' " 00 -1 4, 931.29:. . 75.24' 488 ;�00 <100,573_.35 - 60.7 %: _- ,00 .4,500.00 - 67.9% .00 "270.00 ..0% .001 -.06 100.0% .00 - 1,460.58: 105:9% 00 Col. 100.0W 400:00 752.05, •95.3% :285:02 46,341. -14 89.8% - -.00 .00 100:D 6 - - ..00 .00 100.0% -'.00 - :.- 6,114.65: 114.3% 5,173 .02 - 149,792.54,- 83.3% 100 .00 '100.0% . -00 .00:. 100.0% .00 ;26,155..50' -: 53':3% `.!00 . 00 ' 100.01; 00100 100.0% °. 400 =12 969':30. -62.4% o0 - .00.': 100.0% 00 .`. -00 100:0% 7,043..59 .00, :,300.0% 00 -.00. 100:0% °-00 .00 .:'100.0 %,: 00 - "1, 974.66 ''30.2%' -.00 '.00. 100.0 % - .00 :'00" 100:0 %? i OVVN OF REACTING, MA 04/03/2012 15:02 - TOWN OF READING' = Iglytdbud PG ` 2 glapointe - IFY2012 TOWN SPECIAL REVENUE':FUNDS AND _ - - CUMMULATIVE TOWN GRANT ACTIVITY TO MARCH .. FOR 2012 09'- - - - ORIGINAL : "�- TRANFRS /, -; REVISED -- ` - -`. sAVAILABLE .PCT. 'APPROP ':.ADJSTMTS BUDGET YTD EXPENDED ,.,;•ENC /RE4 ,. BUDGET USED:" 3130 LIBRARY - "STATE GRANTS -- 53,839, - 33,375:90 .87,214.49 87,214.49; .. : - -- -,.00 - -.00. 100.0$. 3131 LIBRARY STATE AID -. ..106,169 - :'12;055;68 118,224.45 1,839.10 :. °.00 - '116,385.35 1.6% -. VPOLICING '-'' 12,793 3,200:00 - 15,992.50 14,840 45 ;�' ,.400.00 '...752.05, 9513$ -; 315 0 SGRTE COMMUNITY 59,580'' - 12,022..49 ' 47,557.51 47,557.51 ".; ;: .:.: -00 .00 100.0$':: 3160 CULTURAL °COUNCIL - '20 720 _' 6,100.00 7 26,819.64 21,970.91 '* : -00 -- 4,848.73 81.9$ 3180, STATE; GRANT' CONSERVATION - .16:373' 00 16,372.74 -. :.. - 6,675.59 °- 5,00 '; 9,697.15 40.8$- -. 3190 STATE: GRANT RCASA " 67,263 ':00 67,262.71 67,262 71 i'00' '.00 : 100:0$ -° 3200 HIGHWAY.,CHAPTER 90 -... 567,615 1`,504,066100 2,- .071;681.15 1,507,025.95 :' 514;1'66::46 -50,488.74` 97.6% 3210- SGRT:_- EXTENDED:POLLING HOUR. - - 20,826:.97 .:- .46.,697.97 46,698.00 .. " :. -: .00 - -... _-.03.,;:100.0$. 3220. SETB'_PSAP- OPERATIONS GRANT - .25,871 142,600 - 50,245`05. .192,845.05 192 ;845.05 ­00 ....00 100.0$ 3230 SGRT-- DHCD :PEER'TO -PEER .': '.2,000 - .:..00 - 2,000.00 2;000 -.00 . -- :00 - 100_0$ - 3240':EOP55'PUBLIC.:SAFETY GRANTS 16,950 x..00 .16,950.00 16,950.00 ','' '. -00 - .00..100.0% .TOTAL STATE - GRANTS. 1,376,185 :' 1,649,295:.69 -- .-3,025,480.50 2,280,599.00. '521,610. -.05, 223,271.45, .92.6$' 0030 REVOLVING :FUNDS ? 4005 CULTURAL COUNCIL INTEREST 275 - 33 •:: 307.71. 269.96.:00 -. 37.75 87.7$- 4030. POLICE- SPECIAL DETAIL :- 36,073 609,691.00 , .,,10 '573;617.71 623;832.60 - -.00 - 50,214.89' 108.8$ -. 4040 POLICE --.DRUG ' ENFORCEMENT - - 27,162 ..,00 .`.: .00 . -00 -- 27,162 -:45 .0% 4045PUBLIC 'WORKS SPECIAL DETAI - 0 .' ,4,155: -93 .;27,162.45 '.4,155.93 4,155 93 .:. 00 .00 100.D$- 4050 - INS RESTITUTION'_ UNDER $20K .. 6,250 - 31,631 _ :51 "- ...37,881.22 . 11,269.77. 00- 26,611.45 29.8$ 4060 DESIGN REVIEW FEES ... '. 19,717 '' 34..40 19,751.15 504.00 -: .00 -. -.- 19;247.15. 2. 6$'• 4080 SUNSET ROCK DEVELOPMENT 506 -, t':.00 - 500.00. - .00 -. 00 - 500.00 - '.0$ -.' 4100 SIGNAGE' MITIGATION`:- PULTE - 0 .: :'" 60,000;.00 60, 000.00 - .00 ',' `.00 60,000..00 .0$` 4620 .AFFORDABLE HOUSING. FUND - :' 458,526 °'..- .' -- 551.84 459, 077.52. 200, 000.00 -, -. - ;:-- .00,. - 259,077..52 -: ,43.6&: 4731-- MATTERA'CABIN GRANTS 100 ...00 - -- 100.00.00.:- -': "'. x.00 100.00 .0$ -. - TOTAL REVOLVING FUNDS - 476,456 706,097. 78, :1,182,553.69: 840;032.26 -: . -00 342,521.43. 71.0$:. 0031 VOTED REVOLVING - :FUNDS 4200 INSPECTION PERMIT REVOLVIN - 664 - 242, 437:00 243,101.44 17,262.00 -.00 ': 225,839.44: 7.1$a. 4220 TRAIL MAINT*'MAPLEWOOD DONA 8,044 -_ .00'>- - 8,043.92 00 -:'.00 -i 4222 LIBRARY FINES- :REVOLVING FU -14 -: 9,77.7:.99 9,764.19 . 8,515.36 :00 -- 1,248:,83 87.2$.. 4230- MATTERA CABIN' REVOVLING FU 0 3, 370,1 00 3,370.00 - 1,871.12 i .00 - 1,498.88• 55.596 4240 COMPOST--EINS 0 1,250x00 - ,. _- .. 1,250.00 :1,250.00 -= r. ..00 - - ,- ;00. 100.0$.`. 4250 PUBLIC HEALTH CLINICS 58,868 - ';882.25 -' 59,750.19 . 15,049.85 -- - -.00 '44,700:34_ 25.2t TOTAL VOTED REVOLVING FUNDS 67,563 .' 257,717.24 325,279.74 43,948.33 -.00 '281,331.41r 13.5$:' 0032 REVLLVING FUND -- MAJOR,- .'... 9 TOWN" OF READING, MA 04/03/2012 15:02 TOWN OF READING. 36 ' 963".. .00. 30,963.00 30,963.00 00 ..00 PG 3 glapointe IFY2012 TOWN SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS AND 7,181.34 - O.50.00 .00. iglytdbud -.7$.. CUMMULATIVE TOWN GRANT ACTIVITY TO MARCH TREE COLLECTION 915.00 915.00 1251.40 09 ,;zoo ..663 60' 27.5$ 4703 DONATION-SIGNS 1,017. •1,- 523.00- 2,540.31 .00,: ORIGINAL TRANFRS/ REVISED' W 4704�:DONATIONS - CEMETERY AVAILABLE. PCT .00 0632 R-EVLOVING FUND --MAJOR APPROP ADJSTMTS BUDGET -YTD EXPENDED ENC/IREQ , 00- BUDGET USED 4705 DONATIONS ELDER SERVICES 17,175 880.00 18,054.87 346.33 .00 17,708.54 4020 RECREATION SELF SUPPORTI 182,279 _361,682.02 4706 544,160.68 3 , 718 346,639.51 • .00 8,450�.02 189,071.15 65.3% 3,672 ­TOTAL REVLOVING FUND MAJOR 182,279i, 361;882.02 4708'DONATIONS 544,160.68, lioso '346,639.51 .00 8,450 02 189,071.15 .00 00 1,080:44 00391 SPECIAL,REVENUE FD-MAJOR .0% 4709 FIRE DEPT DONATIONS 0 1,015.00 11015.00 *00 00 1,015:00 3176 SGRT� . ­TITLE V (SEPTIC) _10185B. 666.00 4710,DONATIONS 11,523. 67 41660.34 00 5,750.00 00 6,863.33 •40.4 %x. TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FD-MAJOR .10,858 ' 666.00 4711'. 11,523.67 4,660.34: 799.00 Ao .6,863.33 40.41; 0040 RECEIPTS TO BE APPROPRIATED 4712 CITIES FOR CLIMATE CONTROL 00 657.64' AD,-. 657.64 4090 ADAMS WAY PERFORMANCE DEPO T 4,275 .00 4713,"DONATIONS 4,275.00 1,006 006 .00 1,006.19 Ao, 4i275.00 .00 .0% 11006.19 4110-WETLAND:PROTECTION FEES 5171B:50 4714 9, 703.28,-- 5 603 �.00 20 8, 048.99 .00 '9,703.28 .0% 6 163579 _ 4610.SALE OF-REAL.ESTATE 1;004,822 ..;1,511.39 4715 1,006,333.82: -.;^ .:300,000.00 .00 100,000.00 .00 706,333.82 29.8% 4630.WALKERS,BROOK MITIGATION F 72 � 00 71.68 � 6. . '� . -. 00 '.DO .0% 4650 SALE OF CEMETARY LOTS _24196'0'00 181,699.14, 25,000.00 .00 .156,6.99.14 13.84 .TO TAIRECEIPTS TO 13B APPROPRIA" 1,169,893,1 312-,189.89 1,202,082.92 325,000.00 00 877,062:92 27.0% 0050 GIFTS & DONATIONS 3090 ELDER AFFAIRS GRANT. 36 ' 963".. .00. 30,963.00 30,963.00 00 ..00 100. 0% 4701: DONATIONS SPECIFIED POLICE 7141 4 -4000 7,181.34 - O.50.00 .00. 7;131.34, -.7$.. 4702-DONATION TREE COLLECTION 915.00 915.00 1251.40 ,;zoo ..663 60' 27.5$ 4703 DONATION-SIGNS 1,017. •1,- 523.00- 2,540.31 .00,: 0 0 :2, 5401.31 W 4704�:DONATIONS - CEMETERY :, 56 .00 56.00 .00 100 :� �, 56. , 00- .0% 4705 DONATIONS ELDER SERVICES 17,175 880.00 18,054.87 346.33 .00 17,708.54 1.9* 4706 MYSTIC VALLEY GRANT 3 , 718 • .00 3,718.44 45.85 00 3,672 59 4708'DONATIONS - S.A.F.E. lioso .00 1,080.44 - .00 00 1,080:44 .0% 4709 FIRE DEPT DONATIONS 0 1,015.00 11015.00 *00 00 1,015:00 �.0% 4710,DONATIONS - VARIOUS PROJEC ',51000 .750. 00 5,750.00 13499 00 5,615.01.. 2.3$;` 4711'. DONATIONS - BENCHES .'703:00 799.00 ..00 3 5 9 9 B 4712 CITIES FOR CLIMATE CONTROL 00 657.64' AD,-. 657.64 0% 4713,"DONATIONS - HISTORIC COMM 1,006 006 .00 1,006.19 .00 00 11006.19 D% 4714 HUMAN SERVICES DONATIONS 5 603 2 446 20 8, 048.99 .1,885.20 00 6 163579 23 .4961 4715 READING ICE ARENA FUNDS loo: 000 .00 100,000.00 000,000.00 .00 .00 100.0t 7 OWN OF RE400NIG, MA 04/03/2012 15:02 TOWN OF READING - - PG -.4 glapointe IFY2012 TOWN SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS AND .. glytdbud - CUMMULATIVB TOWN GRANT ACTIVITY TO MARCH - FOR 2012 09 _- - ORIGINAL. ;TRANFRS/ ,. REVISBD -:' .' AVAILABLE PCT ..'APPROP " " ...'ADJSTMTS ... •. BUDGET YTD- EXPBNDED� ENC /REQ ''BUDGET.. USED 4716 LIBRARY - DONATIONS - 106 -787 11,.349.82 - 118,137.01 - -- 3,698.82' -. 1,566.00 - 112,872.19 :: 4.5 %. 4718. BANCROFT'TOT -LOT FUND'.. - '.- 930: ;..... .00 929.76 699.00 -�." .00 230. -76 .75 -.2% 4719 FRIENDS OF HUNT - .PARK, _ 526 . - -- .00 526.06:- .': 374.48 ';.00'.. 151 -.58- ,71.2 %' 4720 POLICE DONATIONS :ACCOUNT - '2,125 .00 - -. ..,.- 2,125.00 . .00 '1 ;..00 -' 2,.125.00 .0 %= 4726 RECREATION DONATIONS -. - ,37282_: '- 71,910.75' 109,192.72. '67,546.33 - .00 - 91,646.39 -9 - 61. % 4728 COMMUNITY -SVC DEPT.'DONATIO -` -2,,280 - 29_57 -. '2,309:571 - .00 -_ :- ..00 2,309.57.:0$:_ 4729 MEMORIAL' PARK DONATIONS ' '.552 -..- 2,408.00:x. 2,960.03 - - -. _ 2;408.00 " -.00 552.03 81.4 %; 4730 RCASA DONATIONS - - �., 500 < - .00.- 500.00 ":_ "' .00 x.00 " 500.00 .0 %, TOTAL GIFTS. DONATIONS -.. 324,496 93,970.34 418,466.37 i' 208,403.40 1,925:98 208,136.99. 50.3 %` GRAND TOTAL ,4,305,457 3',307,105.44 7,612,562.74 - 4,797,332.45 -. 537,159 - .072,278,071.22 70.1 %:. '... ** END OF REPORT - Generated' by Gail LaPointe ? co cil C3 2501..TITLE .I (323B) SCHOOL IMPR 2510 TITLE I (I #305): : 2S30 DRUG FREE(- #331) 2540 'EARLY CHILDHOOD '(' #262) 2550 PROJECT'LIFESKILLS (EOPS) 2560 U.S'. . HISTORY.GRANT - (84.115 2570'P.L.94 -142 :( -' #240) 2580 PHYS ED (PEP)GRANT 2590, TEACHER -QUALITY ( #140) 2600 SPED PROF;DEVEL ( #274) 2610 ED THROUGH'-TECH.( #160) 2620 FORT SCHOOL'' READINESS 2690 TEACHING AMERICAN HISTORY 2700- INTEROP- :FRAMEWORK IMPLEm 2720 FGRT RACE -TO THE TOP .TOTAL FEDERAL GRANTS 0011�ARRA FEDERAL STIMULUS GRANTS 2630 FGRT ARRA.SFSF FED STIMULU 2640'FGRT- ARRAIDEA STIMULUS FU 2650 FGRT ARRArIDEA EARLY CHILD 2670.FGRT ARRA -EECBG ENERGY GRA 2710 -FGRT ED ;JOBS - TOWN OF READING.. NlA TOWN OF READING - - FY2012 SCHOOL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS AND CUMMULATIVE SCHOOL GRANT ACTIVITY - MARCH :.TOTAL ARRA :.FEDERAL STIMULUS GR 0020 STATE .GRANTS - 3510METCO ( #317) 3530 ACADEMIC SUPPORT ( #632) 3540SGRT- .CIRCUIT_: BREAKER 3550 EXPANDED•LEARNING TIME GRA 3560 GIFTED/TALENTED (' #580) 3590, - SGRT S SAFEISCHOOLS PROGRAM ORIGINAL TRANFRS /. REVISED APPROP ADJSTMTS BUDGET YTD: EXPENDED 1,500- - ` .00 '- 1,500.00 1500.00. .00 483,99345;995.04 71,967.87- 437,998.04:-.366,930.17 6% - 30,220 - 378.57 100. 29,840.93 -- 29,.840.93 9,349.63,:, - 69,824 "- .1,137.60 68,686.40 - x.59,336.77 - 5,416..' - 3,797.50..- .00 1,618.67 1,518.67 100..0% 590,203 - .91475.67 - 580,726.99= - 580,.726.99 -5% 3,.929,668 -- 124,403.99. 1 - 3,805,263.73 "3,366,.201.47 - 7,375.00 " 9,235''- 38,459.41., .00 9,234..98 9,.234.98 298, -681 .- 179.34 60.7% 298,502.02 .00 252,667.61 " . 66,559' - -. " .00 '66,559.45- 34,622.19 . - 6,029.,:. - .00. .. 6,029.00 262,087.62. - ",73.8% 23,306 72;650.00 95,955.74 ,'6,029.00 .95,124.85 - 999,818 :00 999,818.00. -56.2% 737,730.38 13,182.92 6,970 .. .00 .- •6,970.00 - 6,970.00 .00 8,900 -- "' .00 8,900.00 5,000.00 - 1.00 6;530,322 - 112,717:71 % - 6,417,603.95 00 '5,552,634.01 .00 2,002, 727-.,.. - - -- 33,867.06 1,968,859.94. 1,968,859.94 100.0% 1,166,675 - 21,404.33. .00 1,145,270.67.. - 1,145,269.67 - ..- 42,684 ,140.75 129, 900.35, -. 42,824.35.. 96:5% - - -: 42- ,824.35 226.81 5.150, 000 :; ..00 150,000.00 -r .-150,000.00 ..00 414, 707 -.00 ,. 414,.707.00 -.00 ^284, 807.65 :- 51,788 31776,793 - 55,130.64 3,721,661.96. .00 3,591,761.61 .00?•. 1.392242 r- 35,126.25 :" 1,357,115.69.- 1,200,516.00 "100.0% ". 52,,701 11 ° 1, 026.40. .00 51,674.67;' .00`''100. 42;488.42 "0% 4,112,559 - 104,637.71 4,007,921.71 4,059;709.71 : - 285 •. :+`- -` .-00' - 285_36 .. -- 285.36 '..16;944 .00 16,944.41:- 16,944.41 ..1,500 .00 1,500.00.: 1,500.00 00 ..00`100_.04 .00 71,967.87- '83. 6% 100. ".0% .00 9,349.63,:, `86.4% - :00 ..00 100 -:0% .00 '. 00- 100..0% .00 439;062.26 ^ 88 -: -5% .00 1 .00;'.100.02 - 7,375.00 38,459.41., 87.1$ 5,807.92 26,129:34, -' 60.7% .00 .00' 100.0v .00 830.89; - 99.1% .00 262,087.62. ",73.8% .9000.100.0% _ .00 . '3,900.00:: -' -56.2% 13,182.92 851,787.02' '86.7% " - .00 `.00 "' 100.0% .00 - 1.00 - .'100_0 % - 00 .00 11'00.0% : 00 .00. - -. 100.0% .00 '1129,899.35. 68:7% - ` -:00 129, 900.35, 96:5% 226.81 .156,372.88'. .88:5%. ..00 -91186.25 -.00 :- 51,788 - :00.'..101.3% -. .00 .00?•. 100: 0% .00- .00 -- "100.0% .00 .00`''100. "0% 011 J 04/03/2012 15:20 glapointe FOR 2012. 09 TOkNN OF READING, 11AA ITOWN OF READING - PG 2 FY2012 _ SCHOOL�SPECIAL REVENUE FONDS AND Iglytdbud CUMMOLATIVE'•SCHOOL GRANT ACTIVITY - MARCH - ORIGINAL TRANPRS/ REVISED :. ,;APPROP ". ADJSTMTS :" - .BUDGET YTD EXPENDED .,ENC /REQ 3600 SGRT SPED PROGRAM REVEIW '4,303 - - '.00� 258,300:.80. 4,302.65 - 3620 "'SCHOOL:.:NURSE PROF DEV GRAN 4,750 -- 538..00. 72.6%: 4,212.00. " .z TOTAL .STATE GRANTS 5;584,714 - 141,328:36 895',376.64 '.5;443,.385.77' 1,019.'00 0030 REVOLVING FUNDS - -71_2% 4325 - GUIDANCE. REVOLVING FUND -3,606 48,605..00 . -- 52,213.3B 4326 COOLIDGE EXTRACURRICULAR 71710 - - :- .680.00- 8,390.00 4327 PARKER:. EXTRACURRICULAR i 3,705 : '-- 385.00 '4,090.00 4330 (SCHOOL ;TRANSPORTATION >. -' ' -'- 0 '.48,125.39 48.,125.39' 4350': DRAMA - ACTIVITIES HIGHSCHOO - - '37,575 81,135..41= - 118,709.97 4354 _BAND.EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIV -.- .3,457 21,662.:50" - 25,119.24 ' 4360 DRAMA ACTIVITIES (PARKER)- :22,060 '19,803.11 - 41,863.29 4370-PARKER AFTER SCHOOL ACTIVI '.: 8,256 - 17,371:OD '25,627.08 4378. EXTENDED.' DAY PROGRAM ' 230,176 - 485,736.25 . 7.15,912.38 4380;DRAMA;'ACTIVITIES COOLIDGE,. . 29,526 22,364.00- •51,890.46 4400 "SUMMER`SCHOOL PROGRAM -. "44,620" -'24,- 530.00 -." 69,149.97 4410 • RISE, PRESCHOOL PROGRAM .. - •259,413 120. 830 .15 - 380,243.14 4420 USE OF SCHOOL PROPERTY' .. •136,197 - '145;308.05 - 281,505.30 4430' TUITION -(SPED PROGRAM) " 411,505 - - 120,270.53 .531,775.03 4440? ALL-DAY . KINDERGARTEN PROGR - 479,033 . 979,771.25 4450- 'LOST.'iBOOKS ..',.500,738.10 13,043 :.., -: -. 596.60: _:- 13,639.66 .TOTAL -: REVOLVING FUNDS 1,689,884 - .1,658,141..29 3,348,025.54 - 0032 : REVOLVING FUND - MAJOR ; 4320 ATHLETIC ACTIVITIES 190,368 232,586'.68 422, 954C72 - TOTAL. REVLLVING FUND - MAJOR.- .190,368 232,586.68 := 422,.954.72 0039 SPECIAL,REVENUE FD -MAJOR ". 4310 SCHOOL: LUNCH PROGRAM 244,010_ -- 960,669.01 1,204,678.63' 4390 ADULT EDUCATION PROGRAM 29,332 24,549 -.80 %'53,882.18., TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FD -MAJOR . - ..,273,342 -...'' 985,21B.81 1258,!560.81 0050 GIFTS,& DONATIONS 4,302.65 4.212.00 5,329, - 3.87.83 14,923.25 3,413:00 280.00 47,735.39 61,303.46 5,337.64 16,830.07 17,879.99 252,504.66 28,874.33 18,604.36 103,183.44 98,873.91 67,383.47 317,262.40 2,490.08 1,056,889.45 ^9 .00 226x81 .00 00 .00 200.00 .00 188.'90 00 15,349.00 :'00 00 1,402:51 -00 360.00 :'00 3 B.17 17.,538,:58 7 .164,653.92 '.00 AILABLE -PCT BUDGET: USED ':00 100.0% •.00 100.0% 77113 97.9% 3.7,290.13 28.6% 4,977.00 40:7%. .3,810.00 6.8% 390.00..- -99.2% ;.57,206:51. 51.8%` 19, 781:60. 21. 2% 24,.844.32 40.7% ,7,747109 69.8% 448,.058:72 37.4 % 23, 016:.13 55.6%- - •50,�545:61 26.9% - '275.657:19 - 27.5% .182,,631..39 - 35.1 %. - ?464,021:56 .12.7 %` e'662 :508.85 32.4 %' 11,- 111. 41 . 18.5% 2,273;597.51 - 32.1% 258,300•.80 258,300:.80. 38.9% 38.9% 164;653.92 ':00 258,300•.80 38.9% 873,491.40 1,019(.00 .330,- 168.23 72.6%: 21,685.24 " ':'.00 .3 1,996.94 .40.6 %•. 895',376.64 1,019.'00 ,362,165'.17 -71_2% cn N TO ,% /N OF READING, MA 04/03/2012 15:20 - (TOWN OF READING' -'+ - - . PGA- - 3 glapointe - - FY2012 SCHOOL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS.AND - - glytdbud. CUNNULATIVE SCHOOL GRANT ACTIVITY- MARCH - FOR 2012 09 ORIGINAL TRANFRS/ '.REVISED 'AVAILABLE -PCT 0050' :.GIFTS..& DONATIONS -. APPROP ADJSTMTS BUDGET YTD EXPENDED .- ENC /REQ I,; BUDGET: USED - 4751 JOSHUA EATON DONATION ACCO 4752 '.HIGH SCHOOL DONATIONS 4753 '.WOOD END' PLAYGROUND- DONATI" 4754:DONATION -' SCIENCE(ELEM)' 4755 BURNS FOUNDATION (COOLIDGE 4756 PARKER SCHL JUMP &GO BC /BS 4757 INTEL FOUNDATION .(COOLIDGE 4790 "GIFT SCHOOL DISTRICT WIDE 4791, BARROWS DONATION FUND_ 4792- BIRCH DONATION FUND 4793:.EATON,:DOANTION FUND.. 4794. KILLAM DONATION -FUND- 4795 -WOOD END DONATION FUND 4796 COOLIDGE DONATION.ACCOUNT. 4797: PARKER.DONATION .FUND 4798 HIGH-SCHOOL DONATION FUND 4799 ": SPECIAL. ED' GIFTS & DONATIO TOTAL GIFTS & DONATIONS - GRAND TO .•' 9,630 ;':') 1,381.13 -. •65,347.79 11;011.60' - 108,062.73 -' 38.:7$ , -.',. 00' J00 - il, 011.60 4,097,584.7L 8013$ - -'END OF REPORT - 'Generated .0$ -1,262 :. - .00 - 1;262.24. ''.00 - '.00 1,262.24 .0% .. l 200 - "_(. _. .00 ,200.00 -. .. _:_,:. .00 ,.. _ 2.00 -:, '. -. 200.00 - .0% - 5,403. 00 " -" 5,403.35 - -_` .00 '.00 5,.403:35-., ..03 4,299 - -. - '.00 -. 4,299.03 1,181:25 " ,:00. 3.1117.78 27.5$ _ : -2,750 -' - .00 2,749.62 - -- ..2,.745.00 :.00 '._ 4.62 99..8$ - >. 0 ! -50.00 - 50.00. .00 ,00 50.00 - .0$' 6,054. :,> 16;- 875.70 22,929.32 2,741.21 -..- .00 20,188.11'' 12.0$' _- _ -- 23,667 - 550.00 24,216.78 r. 12;299.02 .00 -- -�" 11,917.76 ..- 50:8$_ - -- -- :1,488 -- 'A, 773. 64 6,261.50 3,736.37 i.00 2,325.13 3,270 1;1075.00 - ', 4,345.20- - 1,370.95 - ':'00 -• 2,974.25" 31.6$ -:: 597 993.15 1,590.58 26.00 ' 660.00 904.58; 43.1$'" 3,423 ': 2,776.12 - : 6,198.87 3,,.409.78 -:': Do 2,789.09• 55.0t,S - 16,604 13`,428.01 - 30,031.76. 14,348.31.' - "' 822'.00 14,861.45 50.5$- - - 14,305 , •... ;.6- „951:31 21;256.60 - = 12,386.73 - 200.:00 - -. 8,;669.87'- 59.2$:- - 19,224 6;'854.00 26,077.621 11- X103.17 1 !.."13,847.90 - -. 46, ..9 . 6,335 2', -000.00' ,8,335.00` - .00 _- y "'.;00 '.. 8,335.0Op W. -- 118,511 •' 57,.708.06 176,219.07 -. •65,347.79 - - 2808.55 - 108,062.73 -' 38.:7$ TAL ` 18,163,934 2,624,478.13 20,788,411.82.. 16,656,051.25 34,775 :86 4,097,584.7L 8013$ - -'END OF REPORT - 'Generated by Gaily LaPointe' *" - U1 W Town of Reading, Massachusetts Encumbrances Balance Balance 01Jul -11 31- Mar -12 $ S General government: Town Manager: Expenses 2,200 2,200 Board of Assessor Expenses 6,500 - Finance: Expenses 2,078 644 Lew: Expenses 1,740 1,740 Human Resources: Expenses 811 530 Technology: Expenses - 43,081 14,208 Employee benefits: Expenses 25,000 11,500 Library: Expenses 8,313 - Police: Expenses 9,010 110 Fire: Capital Expenses 2,604 2,223 Dispatchers: Expenses 4,725 - School department: Expenses 403,560 10,292 DPW Engineering Expenses 243 - Hlghway and equipment Expenses - 28,532 15,635 Capital 290,026 136,366 DPW Administration Expenses 1,098 - Street lighting Expenses 4,513 - Waste Collection Expenses 900 - Cemetery: Expenses 4,530 2,160 Parks and Forestry Expenses 12.120 5 General government totals 851,584 197,613 Enterprise funds: Water fund: Expenses 14,523 696 Capital 92,245 89,245 Sewer fund: Expenses 37,661 - Capital 378,412 227,791 Storm Water fund: Expenses Capital - - Enterprise funds totals 522,841 317,732 Total 1,374,425 - 515,345 FY13 Budget Table of Contents Overview — General Fund A. Budget introduction ➢ Typical Homeowner: FYI Revenues & H. Expenses ➢ FY13 -17: Five Year Financial Outlook ➢ Town Manager FY 13 Budget Message ➢ Finance Committee FY13 Budget Message ➢ FY13 Revenues ➢ FYI Spending Scorecard (Town Meeting votes) Shared Costs — General Fund B. Benefits (and Budget Reports format explanation) C. Capital D. Debt Service E. Vocational Education Municipal Government — General Fund F. Overview G. Town Administration H. Accounting I. Finance J. Finance Committee Reserve Fund K. Community Services L. Library M. Department of Public Works N. Public Safety Overview O. Police Department P. Fire Department Q. Dispatch School Department.— General Fund U. School Department V. Town Facilities Municipal Government — Enterprise Funds W. Water X. Sewer Y. Storm Water Rates & Reserves Appendix (Blue pages) List of Capital FY13 -FY22 Debt Service Schedule FY13 -FY25 Town Special Revenue Funds School Special Revenue Funds Encumbrances al cn Typical Reading Homeowner FY 2012 Revenues and Expenses Revenues The average assessed value of a.single family home in Reading has not changed much despite the housing slump nationally. Today this value stands at $444,500 compared to $452,066 five years ago, for a 1.7% decrease. For simplicity, assume the typical Reading Homeowner has a $400,000 home. In FY 2012, that homeowner was assessed at a $13.85 per $1,000 of value rate, and therefore paid.$5,520 in local property taxes. Property taxes are the largest single source of revenue for the Town and Schools. As other sources of revenues ranging from local fees and to the state and federal governments funding have declined, the property tax has become a higher percent of total revenue. Here is the current FY12 situation: Sources of Funds FY12 (OOOs) FY12 Portion Typical Homeowner Property taxes $52,663 69% $5,520 State & Fed Aid 12,968 17% 1,359 Other Local Revs. 9,508 13% 997 Cash Reserves 863 1% 90 TOTAL $76,002 $7,966 Therefore in terms of revenues, to help the payments by the typical homeowner an additional $2,356 comes to the Town from a variety of sources, including • State ($1,359) and Federal ($0) aid; • Other local revenues including excise taxes ($283), dividend payments from Reading Municipal Light Department ($23t), charges for services such as building permits ($155), support payments from the enterprise funds ($79), interest earnings ($21), support from the sale of real estate fund ($31), the new meals tax ($21) and a variety of miscellaneous items; > In addition, the FY 2012 Budget was approved with the use of nearly $1 million from cash reserves ($90). CA rn Expenses Starting with the. $7,966 revenue generated by the typical homeowner, following is a list of the uses of those funds. Note that the first item (State Assessments — almost entirely for the MBTA because Reading has a train station) is the only item not voted on by Town Meeting — it is deducted from State Aid payments. Uses of Funds FY12 (000s) FY12 Portion Typical Homeowner State Assessments $586 1% $61 Schools — Reg Day 21,587 28% 2,263 Spec. Ed. 9,186 12% 963 Mgt &Oth, 2,032 3% 213 Town —Pub. Safety 7,961 10% 834 Pub. Works 5,367 7% 563 Mgt &Fin 2,536 4% 266 Pub. Library _1,242 2% 130 Comm Svcs 1,122 1% 117 Emp /Retiree Benefit 12,846 17% 1,346 Infrastructure* 11,537 15% 1,209 TOTAL $76,002 $7,966 *Note that infrastructure includes Capital, Debt and both School and Town Building Maintenance. The School department spends $3,439 (43 %) — a figure that excludes buildings maintenance. Regular Day ($2,263), Special Education ($963) and all of the other cost centers excluding facilities ($213) comprise that total. The Town spends $1,910 (24 %) on a variety of services. Public Safety ($834), Public Works ($563), Management & Finance ($266), the Public Library ($130) and Community Services ($117) comprise that total. Employee and Retiree benefits use $1,346 (17 %) of general fund revenues. Infrastructure costs make up the rest of the uses of funds. FY12 spending on capital, debt and school & town facilities constituted $1,209 (15 %) as the Reading aggressively invests and maintains buildings and equipmerit. M FY13: Five Year Financial Outlook Town of Reading Budget Summary Projected FY - 2013 One Yr Changes FY - 2013 Projected FY - 2014 One Yr Changes FY - 2014 FY15 57,502,013 5,875,000 12,922,688 3,815,673 One Yr Changes FY - 201 3.3% 3.4% 2.5% -17.1% FY16 59,380,122 6,070,000 13,245,755 3,845,440 One Yr Changes FY - 201E 3.3% 3.3% 2.5% 0.8% FY17 61,078,285 6,240,000 13,576,899 3,777,201 One Yr Changes FY - 2017 2.9% 2.8% 2.5% -1.8% Revenues 54,149,272 2.8% 5,590;000 3.5% 12,300,000 -5.1% 4,471,704 8.9% 55,684,355 2.8% 5,680,000 1.6% 12,607,500 2.5% 4,605,157 3.0% Total Property Taxes Total Other Local Revenues Totallntergov't Revenues Total Transfers & Available Revenues before Free Cash $ 76,510,976 1.8% $ 78,577,012 2.7% $ 80,115,374 2.0% $ 82,541,317 3.0% $ 84,672,385 -2.6 %. Free Cash 1,000,000 15.8% 1,000,000 0.0% 750,000 -25.0% 500,000 -33.3% 500,000 0.0% Net Available Revenues 1 $ 77,510,976 2.0% $ 79,577,012 2.7% $ 80,865,374 1.6% $ 83,041,317 2.7% $ 85,172,385 2.6% Revenues The revenue forecast predicts no increase in FY13 state aid, but +2.5 %increases after that. New growth for some of the major commercial projects is added in one year after it is expected. in order to be conservative. There are revenues in FY13 and FY14 specifically associated with capital and debt expenses. Both of these vanish in the following years, and therefore the revenue picture alone is somewhat incomplete. Please see the Revenue section for further details. Cash Reserves Cash reserves usage is $1.0 million for the FY13 budget, and is expected to be approximately the same for FY14. After that, the use of free cash should be monitored closely and for planning purposes is expected to decline over time. This pattern is a conservative look and uses the FINCOM 5% minimum policy. Budget Outlook After some difficult cuts over the past years, FY13 operating budgets are up over 3.0 %. This is possible because accommodated costs are flat - even including the $600,000 community priority spent on substance abuse prevention efforts. Future years at this point look to have +1.5% to +2.0% operating budgets. These increases may not fully fund the level of service the community expects from both the Town government and the School department. If cash reserves remain strong, it is possible to use more free cash in balancing the budget and improve the operating budget outlook. However, longer term this is not the ideal financial policy. Town. Manager's FY 2013 Recommended Budget Town of Reading, MA The following document constitutes the Town Manager's recommended FY 2013 budget for the Town of Reading for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2012. This budget represents continued conservative fiscal practices given the current financial circumstances, and also represents continued investment in the community. While the data and information is presented to understand every detail of the proposed revenue and expenditure plan, we understand that not all residents of the community have the wherewithal to delve into the details of their municipal budget. Therefore the following is a summary of the key elements of the budget: . Revenues Anticipation of available revenues is realistic: ♦ Property tax revenues are increased 2 %2% plus new growth; ♦ New growth is reflected at historic averages. There is a great deal of new development taking place in Reading, but there are no projected increases in new growth to support the FY 2013 budget. When actual new growth figures become known in the fall of 2012, budget adjustments in the area of Public Safety may be proposed; ♦ Although the Governor's budget reflects an increase in State Aid to Reading of nearly $400,000, we have projected no growth in State Aid. If there is an increase in State Aid in the State budget adopted in June, the Town's FY 2013 budget will be adjusted to reflect a like reduction in the use of free cash; ♦ The Finance Committee has authorized the use of up to $1,500,000 in free cash to balance the FY 2013 budget. Because the use of cash reserves is not sustainable over the long run, the budget as presented utilizes $1,000,000 in free cash at this point, and if State Aid comes in at a higher level, the use of free cash will be reduced further; ♦ Other revenues have been evaluated based on actual 2011/2012 levels, and are believed to be sustainable over time; ♦ In addition to ongoing revenues, there are several one- time revenues that the Town has been working hard to garner, and these revenues will be spent on a four -year investment program of one time expenses. Expenses The expense budget for all Departments is largely unchanged, but the current level and quality of services will be maintained in FY 2013. The somewhat. painful reductions made in FY 2012 are implemented, and we are able to manage within those constraints. There is one important improvement to services identified over the fall and winter of 2011/2012 which is identified as a community priority and that is a unified and Cn co comprehensive increase in efforts to address community substance abuse and violence. Each of the detailed budgets has detailed information on these initiatives, but the major elements include: ♦ Increase of one Police Officer to assist the Department in its efforts to address substance abuse enforcement; ♦ Funding of the Reading Coalition Against Substance Abuse ( RCASA) staffing. RCASA staff was hired under a Federal Drug Free Community grant and the 5 year grant expires in September 2012. The Town is applying for a continuation 5 year grant, but we will not know whether we have been successful until August. There are only 30 such grants being awarded nationwide. These funds are budgeted in order to continue and expand the RCASA work in the event that the Federal grant is not successful; ♦ Within the School Department there are several initiatives including additional curriculum efforts in Middle School and High School, additional counseling, and additional efforts to address the needs of High School youth with substance abuse and other issues. Investment One of the more exciting initiatives in the FY 2013 budget is the additional investment that we are able to make in a variety of ways which will benefit the community in the short and long run: ♦ Investment in Substance Abuse and Violence prevention. The discussion above and budget details outline the comprehensive community effort in this regard. The total investment is over $500,000 annually; ♦ Investment of $400,000 in up to 2 additional modular classrooms for the School Department to handle enrollment and all day kindergarten demands; ♦ Investment of an additional $150,000 in technology in the School Department. This is primarily to provide for the planned replacement of computers, printers, smart boards and similar items of technology. This is included in the School Department budget, and it is anticipated that the School Department will safeguard this level of funding going forward to ensure that they have within their budget the money to fund their routine technology needs in the future. This is a similar approach to what the Town has done with road improvement funds initially voted as part of a Proposition 2 %: override in 2003; ♦ Increased investment in improvements to public roads totaling over $1 million from the tax levy and State Chapter 90 aid. The Town is -able to make additional community investments to supplement the investments included in the proposed annual operating budget, largely through State payments made to the Town for zoning and permitting of development in the Gateway Smart Growth District (Pulte Homes), and the Downtown Smart Growth District (Oaktree). The Town has in hand and/or expects to have in hand over the coming 3 years, a total of approximately $1.5 million dollars. These moneys should only be spent on one time uses — generally Capital 8 Improvements — according to a plan to spend these funds in FY 2012 and FY 2013 and beyond: ♦ In 2012, as an amendment to the current year's budget, we propose to spend an additional $306,000 on road improvements, and an additional $36,000 on pedestrian improvements; ♦ As part of the FY 2013 spending plan, we propose to invest an additional $230,000 in roads, and an additional $63,000 in pedestrian improvements. Finally, through careful budgeting, wise stewardship of the Town's finances, maintenance of an exceptional working relationship with Reading's employees, and aggressive bidding, the .Town has been able to reduce health insurance expenditures for FY 2012 significantly below the approved budget, and has been able to hold the line on increases for FY 2013. The Town is therefore proposing to invest those savings in a long term Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB). Therefore: ♦ The Town intends to ask Town Meeting to transfer $500,000 of FY 2012 health insurance savings into a newly created OPEB Trust fund to begin to address this liability; ♦ Because FY 2013 Health Insurance costs will be significantly below initial projections, the Town intends to ask Town Meeting to fund an additional $420,000 contribution to the OPEB Trust Fund in 2013. While Reading will always have a limited ability to fund all of the programs and needs of the community, the shared sacrifices to date have resulted in a situation where the Town can make these important and needed investments in our services and facilities. As a community, we need to continue to be prudent in our use of public funds that our residents and businesses work so hard to provide. We appreciate the trust placed in the Town and all of its officials and employees, and we expect to continue to earn that trust. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions or comments regarding this budget, or any other aspect of your Town government. Respectfully submitted, Peter I. Hechenbleikner Town Manager Robert W. LeLacheur, Jr. Assistant Town Manager and Finance Director rn FinCom Town MeetinE Report April 2012 Mr. Moderator and Town Meeting members, thank you for this opportunity to highlight the current state of Reading finances. I would like to first take a moment to thank Marsie West for her almost 9 years of service on FinCom. Her time on the committee, including most recently serving as Chairperson, were important factors in guiding Reading towards the sound financial position which we are able to present tonight. We wish Marsie success as she joins the RMLD Board. John Arena has also recently left the Finance Committee, and we wish him success in joining the Board of Selectmen. I deliberated on whether to start with the good news or the bad news. I chose the latter and will begin by highlighting the challenges which lay ahead that we will soon need to face. We can then move on to focus on the good news about Reading and the more immediate financial decisions before us tonight. The bad news is the Federal financial picture. To put it mildly, Congress does not have its financial house in order. It is, in essence, like so many Americans, reaching its credit limit, and the financial markets are beginning to demand action. The irresponsible behavior that has produced debt levels that are too high and a spending rate that is unsustainable will directly impact our local finances. We can expect there will be fewer dollars available to aid states, cities and towns, as the Federal government is forced to make cuts. We can also expect that the downstream effects of unsustainable healthcare costs will reach Reading. And, as Federal programs are cut or abandoned, it will be up to State and local governments to decide whether to fill the void left by those cuts. As we review the budget that is before us tonight, we need to keep this looming turbulence in mind. Reading has other financial challenges to address with both the Killam School and the Public Library in need of significant renovations. Every effort will be made to secure partial State funding for these projects and, of course, recommendations will be made in a future Special Town Meeting. Similar to our pension liability which we began to fund annually many years ago, Reading faces a retirement liability for health insurance, referred to as OPEB. In this Warrant and this budget you will find recommendations which begin to fund this sizable long term liability. It is important to start funding OPEB, and in the coming months FinCom will meet with Town staff to determine if a disciplined approach and policy should be developed to eventually fully fund the liability. Fortunately, the budget which Reading manages has mostly good news to report. Over the past 3 or 4 years Reading has exhibited exemplary financial discipline and consistently made timely and difficult financial decisions. Our financial strength was recently affirmed by Standard & Poor's when they re- issued a double -A credit rating for Reading. The key factors which they cited were: strong housing values, despite a soft housing market; a strong financial position underpinned by strong financial management; and, a low debt burden with manageable capital needs. The citizens of Reading are fortunate to have a committed and. competent group of employees, volunteers and elected officials that have produced this reaffirmation during challenging times. These individuals rn N FinCom Town Meeting Report April 2012 have demonstrated a high level of collaboration and respect for each other and the process, which is essential for effective financial management. Notable financial highlights include: • Our consistent investment in technology to improve productivity, services and education. • The aggressive and intelligent refinancing of the majority of our longterm debt to take advantage of low interest rates and our AA credit rating, which has the immediate effect of lowering taxpayer bills and also allowing us to apply additional funds to other capital needs. The total savings for Reading was over $4 million. • Maintenance of a strong cash position, allowing us to absorb annual funding fluctuations and the flexibility to contribute to the operating budget to consistently fund vital services. Our strong free cash and reserve cash positions will be particularly critical in the coming years as we are forced to deal with trickle -down results of the federal budget situation. • The Town's continued commitment to investment in infrastructure, buildings and equipment means that today we can begin to talk about putting additional funds towards roads and other long -term needs. • Exemplary investment in conservation efforts with the most notable being in energy, recycling and rubbish. The leadership and investment in these areas have resulted in significant long -term savings and funds being available for other operating and capital priorities. • We need to acknowledge the parties on both sides of the union negotiations for agreeing to realistic and fair terms that allow Reading to maintain high standards of service during challenging financial times. We need to thank the employees as well for being positively involved in the financial picture and for getting optimal value from the funds provided. • Another financial highlight was the unseasonably warm winter, which allowed us a one time savings of more than $600,000 on snow removal compared to the previous fiscal year. • And one final highlight, although considerable uncertainty exists for the future, the recent competitive bid for healthcare insurance allowed us to save over $500,000 vs. the original 2013 projection. rn W FinCom Town Meeting Report April 2012 Reading has struck a financially sound balance by: (1) taking a long term view; (2) facing tough decisions early; and (3) using realistic and conservative financial planning. As a result, today, we give ourselves the flexibility to fund and address current and pressing issues. In this budget you will find considerable focus on priorities set by the Town and School, and on the pressing matter of substance abuse and other programs for students and citizens in need. It is remarkable in the midst of challenging financial times that the Town has been able to direct additional funds in this budget to address critical community needs. The boards and Committees will endeavor, as we do every year, to continually seek new sources of revenue and new ways to eliminate costs. It is important, however, that we be realistic about the contribution these efforts can make going forward. Town and School budgets have been scoured and after multiple productive years of successful rebidding, restructuring and cost - saving initiatives, we can anticipate new savings will be more difficult to find. It is important for Town Meeting members and the citizens of Reading to always be vigilant and critical in assessing the Towns use of taxpayer dollars and to be vocal and involved in establishing priorities. We strive for and, I believe, have achieved a level of transparency that allows citizens the opportunity to understand exactly how tax dollars and fees are used. However, what became apparent in the budget deliberations and the events leading up to tonight's vote, is that the citizens of Reading also owe a debt of gratitude to the competent and dedicated teams that have produced these results. By most measures Reading is demonstrating a commitment to high standards, exemplary leadership and a respect for taxpayers by maximizing services and optimizing the use of every dollar. Thank you again for the opportunity to comment. David Greenfield, Chair Barry Berman, Vice Chair Jeanne Borawski Mark Dockser Marie Ferrari Paula Perry Hal Torman FY 2013 REVENUES Summary of Revenues — The total FY13 estimated revenues for general government will be $77.5 million, a 2.0% increase from FY12. Without the use of free cash in either year, revenues are forecast to increase 1.8% to $76.5 million in FY13. Over the last twenty years, annual increases in revenues have averaged between 3.0% and +3.5%. Note that the FY14 to FY15 revenue decline is distorted because of a recent debt refinancing, which eliminated $1.0 million in revenues from the Massachusetts School Building Authority, and also lowered debt service cost by over $1.1 million. Past prudent budgeting has maintained a healthy free cash balance. which has been helpful during these difficult economic times. Building the FY12 budget began by using $1.5 million of free cash o, and still the School and Town operating budgets were forecast to a need a 2% reduction. Ultimately the revenue picture improved a bit and benefits costs were reduced. This reduced the use of free cash to $863,309 and the reduction in operating budgets was only -0.5 %. In FY13 $1.0 million of free cash is projected to be used, and operating budgets have increased to +3.6 %. However as we said last year, use of free cash to support the operating budget is unsustainable in the long run and should be phased out as the revenue situation improves'or we reach the minimum reserves of 5% of revenues per the Finance Committee Policy. The following are the highlights of the estimated revenues for FY13: Property Taxes The FY 2013 tax levy includes a 2.5% increase over the combined FY 2012 tax levy and new growth. In recent years Reading has joined most municipalities in becoming more reliant on local property taxes as state aid and local receipts such as excise taxes have declined. We are projecting $250,000 in new growth based on a long term conservative average. This does not include expected new growth from significant economic development activity that is currently underway. Once that figure is released by the Assessors in the fall of 2012, additional FY13 revenues are expected to be available for the Subsequent Town Meeting in November 2012. New Growth 6000s1 2012 Reliance on properly taxes increases 2010 2009 2008 2007 80.0% 325 363 553 700/ - 77-17,:' 843 6D0/ �• } ? X e 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% - . to s�-100 r ,_ _ 200% 100% > 2/;' . � 48%58/ !� w c..... 0.0% Property taxes Local Receipts State Aid Transfers Cash 01=ro7 » FYi3 We are projecting $250,000 in new growth based on a long term conservative average. This does not include expected new growth from significant economic development activity that is currently underway. Once that figure is released by the Assessors in the fall of 2012, additional FY13 revenues are expected to be available for the Subsequent Town Meeting in November 2012. New Growth 6000s1 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 325 363 553 556 549 843 732 After a discussion with the Board of Assessors the overlay account was increased to $600,000 in FY12 and will increase by 2.5% annually from this level. The actual amount may vary from the budgeted amount when the final calculation of the tax rate is made in November. If the provision is not used for abatements, it is released in future years and used to support the budget. (See" Operating transfers /Available Funds" below.) Local Revenues from sources other than property taxes — Five years ago we used very conservative estimates for increasing local receipts and then transitioned into an approach that would be more realistic by using a long -term average. The Finance Committee agreed that in the years that this method causes a revenue deficit, the difference would be made up with an appropriation of Free Cash. In light of current economic conditions, last year we made adjustments to this approach to several categories, and we will do the same type of adjustments this year. So far, our total actual revenues under this method have been fairly close to those predicted. We will avoid revenue deficits that many other communities are experiencing Cn by being somewhat conservative. MOTOR VEHICLE EXCISE — Due to a surprising increase in actual excise tax revenues last year we will forecast an increase to $2.8 million, compared to expectations of $2.5 million a year ago. INTEREST — The town earns interest on the cash it is holding until it has to pay the bills for the town. From 2005 through 2008, we held the funds for large construction projects that earned us considerable annual interest, in excess of $1 million. We did not use the interest on these excess funds in developing the operating budget because we knew it would not be recurring. Those funds were completely spent by FY 2010. In 2007, many of our accounts were earning over 5% interest rates. Since September 2008 interest rates have steeply declined. We are currently earning 0.3% to 1.5% therefore we are estimating interest revenues to be $225,000 next year. Intergovernmental Revenue — We are estimating $12.3 million for FYI state aid, after receiving a similar amount in FYI — excluding what was said to be a $198,264 one -time refund in the fall of 2011. If the state aid figure does improve we will reduce the use of $1.0 million in free cash to balance the FYI budget. Status of Reserves (000's) Operating Transfers /Available Funds — The amount of money available from cemetery sale of lots has remained constant. Sale of real estate funds from the landfill will be available for debt and capital expenses, but are reduced by $50,000 to $250,000. This is consistent with the Capital Improvements Program which will make these funds last for approximately 10 years from FY2005 to FY2014, with a diminishing amount in the latter years. The earnings distribution from the Light Department has been increased 2.7% based on the CPI through December 2011. The Board of Assessors released $475,947 from the overlay surplus. A high figure of $1.0 million is being used from free cash in order to balance the FY2013 budget. Balance Used Proposed Estimated July 1 June 2012 2011 FY2012 FY2013 Balance Free Cash Surplus 5,499 (56) (1,000) 4,443 Sale of Real Estate 1,006 (300) (250) 456 Stabilization Funds General 1,539 0 0 1,539 Smart Growth* 1,009 (331) (368) 310 Buyback 30 0 0 30 Fincom Reserve 150 (34) 0 116 *projected figure; Balance on 3130112 is $702k Operating Transfers /Available Funds — The amount of money available from cemetery sale of lots has remained constant. Sale of real estate funds from the landfill will be available for debt and capital expenses, but are reduced by $50,000 to $250,000. This is consistent with the Capital Improvements Program which will make these funds last for approximately 10 years from FY2005 to FY2014, with a diminishing amount in the latter years. The earnings distribution from the Light Department has been increased 2.7% based on the CPI through December 2011. The Board of Assessors released $475,947 from the overlay surplus. A high figure of $1.0 million is being used from free cash in order to balance the FY2013 budget. RE Town of Reading One Yr One Yr One Yr One Yr One Yr Revenues • Details Projected FY -2013 Changes FY -2013 Projected FY -2014 Changes FY - 2014 Projected FY•2015 Changes FY -201 Projected FY•2016 Changes FY - 2016 Projected FY•2016 Changes FY•2016 414/129:29 AM Property Taxes Tax levy (within levy limit) 52,483,622 3.2% 54,051,962 3.0% 56,172,011 3.9% 58,088,812 3.4% 60,053,532 3.4% New Growth 250,000 - 23.1% 750,000 200.0% 500,000 - 33.3% 500,000 0.0% 250,000 - 50.0% Tax levy (debt exclusion) 2,030,650 -1.4% 1,512,768 -25.5% 1,476,136 -2.4% 1,453,598 -1.5% 1,453,598 0.0% Abatements and exemptions 615,000 2.5% 630,375 2.5% 646,134 2.5% 662,288 2.5% 678,845 2.5% Total Property Taxes 1 54,149,272 2.8%j 55,684,355 2.8%1 57,502,013 3.3%j 59,380,122 3.3%j 61,078,285 2.9% Other Local Revenues Motor Vehicle Excise 2,800,000 3.7% 2,900,000 3.6% 3,000,000 3.4% 3,100,000 3.3% 3,200,000 3.2% Meals Tax 235,000 17.5% 250,000 6.4% 275,000 10.0% 300,000 9.1% 300,000 0.0% Penalties /interest on taxes 175,000 20.7% 175,000 0.0% 180,000 2.9% 185,000 2.8% 190,000 2.7% Payments in lieu of taxes 325,000 3.2% 325,000 0.0% 335,000 3.1% 345,000, 3.0% 355,000 2.9% Charges for services 1,475,000 0.0% 1,475,000 0.0% 1,525,000 3.4% 1,575,000 3.3% 1,625,000 3.2% Licenses & permits 135,000 -13.5% 135,000 0.0% 140,000 3.7% 145,000 3.6% 150,000 3.4% Special Assessments 10,000 0.0% 10,000 0.0% 10,000 0.0% 10,000 0.0% 10,000 0.0% Fines 110,000 - 15.4% 110,000 1101 000 0.0% 110,000 0.0% 110,000 0.0% Interest Earnings 225,000 12.5% 200,000 - 11.1% 200,000 0.0% 200,000 0.0% 200,000 0.0% Medicaid Reimbursement 100,000 42.9% 100,000 0.0% 100,000 0.0% 100,000 0.0°% 100,000 0.0% Other Total Other Local Revenues 5,590,000 3.5% 5,680,000 1.6% 5,875,000 3.4% 6,070,000 3.3% 6,240,000 2.8% Intergovernmental Revenue State Aid 12,300,000 -0.1% 12,607,500 2.5% 12,922,688 2.5% 13,245,755 2.5% 13,576,899 2.5% Federal ARRA/State refund - 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% MSBA - 100.0% Totallnter ov't Revenues 12,300,000 -5.1% 12,607,500 2.5% 12,922,688 2.5% 13,245,755 2.51/6 13,576,899 2.5% Operating Transfers and Available Funds 25,000 0.0% 25,000 0.0% 25,000 0.0% 25,000 0.0% 25,000 0.0% Cemetery sale of lots Sale of real estate funds 250,000 - 16.7% 200,000 - 20.0% 150,000 - 25.0% 100,000 - 33.3% 50,000 - 50.0% _ Reading Ice Arena Authority 100,000 0.0% 100,000 0.0% 100,000 0.0% 100,000 0.0% 100,000 0.0% MSBA payments 215,828 -70.0% 817,305 278.7% RMLD earnings distribution 2,265,738 2.7% 2,322,382 2.5% 2,380,441 2.5% 2,439,952 2.5% . 2,500,951 2.5% Enterprise Fund Support 771,190 2.0% 790,470 2.5% 810,232 2.5% 830,488 2.5% 851,250 2.5% 40R Stabilization Fund 368,000 100.0% Sick buy -back Stabilization Overlay surplus 1 475,947 100.0% 350,000 - 26.5% 350,000 0.0% 350,000 0.0% 250,000 - 28.6% Total Transfers &Available 4,471,104 6.9% 4,605,157 3.0% 3,815,673 •17.1% 3,945,440 0.8% 3,777,201 •1.8% OPERATING REVENUES 76,510,976 1.83% 78,577,012 2.70% 80,115,374 1.96% 82,541,317 3.03% 84,672,385 2.58% Free Cash & Savings 1,000,000 15.8% 1,000,000 750,000 750,000 I 500,000 TOTAL REVENUES 77,510,976 1.98% 79,577,012 2.67% 80,865,374 1.62% 83,291,317 3.00% 85,172,385 2.26% rn J FY13 Spending Scorecard Line Category FY11 Budget revised FY12 Budget FY13 FINCOM % revised chan a $12,845,486 $13,329,635 3.8% $948,000 $1,937,700 104.4% $6,063,446 $4,539,575 - 25.1% $419,343 $325,000 - 22.5% FINCOM votes % Bdgt Town Meeting Member- Notes B99 Benefits $ 11,712,081 7 -0 -0 17.2% C99 Capital $ 1,223,000 7 -0 -0 2.5% D90 Debt service $ 6,158,003 7 -0 -0 5.9% E99 Vocational Education $ 327,946 7 -0 -0 0.4% Total Shared Costs $ 19,421,030 $ 20,276,275 1 $ 20,131,910 1 -0.7% 26.0% $212,611 $217,279 2.2% $487,330 - $491,350 0.8% $156,779- . $159,709 1.9% $1,300. $1,100 - 15.4% $1,089,226 $1,108,433 1.8% $458,321 $511,350 11.6% $150,000 $150,000 0.0% $753,480 $729,282 -3.2% $372,999 $415,050 11.3% $987,717„ $1,007,579 2.0% $253,813 $283,000 11.5% $2,291,414 $2,348,947 2.5% $836,930 $805,400 -3.8% $565,000 $600,000 6.2% $253,575 $200,000 - 21.1% $1,472,159 $1,500,000 1.9% $7,595,269' $8,092,552 6.5% $366,014 ` $377,925 3.3% G91 Town Administration wages $ 211,646 7 -0 -0 0.3% G92 Town Administration expenses $ 442,000 7 -0 -0 0.6% H91 �. Accounting wares $ 155,770 7 -0 -0 0.2% H92 Accounting expenses $ 1,550 7 -0 -0 0.0% - 191 Financewages $ 1,137,410 7 -0 -0 1.4% 192 Finance expenses $ 506,800 7 -0 -0 0.7% J92 FINCOM reserves $ 150,000 7 -0 -0 0.2% K91 Community Services wages $ 885,557 7 -0 -0 0.9% K92 Community Services expenses $ 263,485 7 -0 -0 0.5% L91 lbrary wages $ 966,006 7 -0 -0 1.3% L92 Library expenses $ 268,817 7 -0 -0 0.4% M91 Public Works wages $ 2,351,314 7 -0 -0 3.0% M92 Public Works expenses $ 739,026 7 -0 -0 1.0% M93 Public Works Snow & Ice $ 525,000 7 -0 -0 0.8% M94 Public Works Street Lights $ 241,500 7 -0 -0 0.3% M95 Public Works Rubbish $ 1,560,770 7 -0 -0 1.9% N91 Public Safety wages $ 7,543,727 7 -0 -0 10.4% N92 Public Safety expenses $ 353,854 7 -0 -0 0.5% Total Municipal Gov't $ 18,304,232 $ 18,303,937 $ 18,998,956 3.8% 24.5% $36,005,307. $37,053,287 2.9% $699,877 %$704166 0.6% U99 School Department $ 36,390,308 7 -0 -0 47.8% V99 Town Facilities $ 740,693 7 -0 -0 0.9% Total School & Facilities $ 37,131,001 $ 36,705,184 $ 37,757,453 2.9% 48.7% VOTED GENERAL FUND $ 74,856,263 $ 75,285,396 $ .76,888,319 2.1% 99.2% State Assessments $ 552,912 $ 585,896 $ 617,079 5.3% 0.8% TOTAL .$ 75,409,175 $ 75,871,292 $ 77,505,398 2.2% 100.0% $5,295,343 $5,417,954 2.3% $5,147,890 $5,508,348 7.0% $376,650,` $388,312 3.1% W99- Water Enterprise Fund $ 5,055,924 7 -0 -0 47.9% X99 Sewer Enterprise Fund $ 5,214,720 7 -0 -0 48.7% Y99 Storm Water Enterprise Fund $ 347,826 7 -0 -0 3.4% TOTAL ENTERPRISE FUNDS $10,618,470 $10,819,863 $11,314,614 1 4.6% GRAND TOTAL VOTED 1 $ 85,474,733 1,$ 86,105,279 1 $ 88,202,933 2.4% Benefits, Capital, Debt & Regional Schools FY13 Budgets BUDGETS FYll FY12 FY13 Change Benefits $11,712,081 $12,845,486 $13,329,635 +3.8% Capital $1,273,000 $1,562,500 $1,937,700 +24.0% Debt $6,158,003 $6,063,446 $4,539,575 -25.1% Regional Schools $327,946 $419,343 $325,000 -22.5% TOTAL $19,471,030 $20,890,775 $20,131,910 -3.6% State Assessments* $579,931 $585,840 $617,079 +5.3% Cn *not voted by Town Meeting — State subtracts from local aid payments co Benefits Retirement ($3,653,385; +17.9 %): The Retirement Board voted an increase of +3.9% to the $3.13 million annual contribution required. The Town's self - insured portion has declined to $67,500; a $15,000 expense pays the annual fees associated with seasonal and part-time employees' recent shift from social security to a 403(b) plan; and $25,000 is set aside as every two years the Town is required to conduct an update of the Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) liability. This budget includes a contribution of $420,000 to fund OPEB, on the heels of an expected contribution of $500,000 from surplus FY12 funds at the April 2012 Annual Town Meeting. While this is well below the needed annual contribution of over $1.7 million, it is important to begin to fund this obligation, and to signal to the Auditors and bond rating agencies that the Town takes the OPEB liability seriously. A longer term plan to increase this funding will occur as the pension liability becomes fully funded, or sooner if it becomes required by law. Worker Compensation ($341,250; +5.0 %): An estimated 5% increase is projected as of early January 2012. Further adjustments will arise during the budget process. Unemployment Compensation ($120,000; - 20.0 %): Less of an unemployment liability developed from the budget reductions of FY12, and no significant further staff reductions are planned in FY13. R Health & Life Insurance ($8,475,000; - 1.0 %): Late last spring management negotiated several plan design changes with all unions from the Town, School and Light departments, resulting in higher out of pocket expenses for employees and retirees but lower insurance. premium costs. This continued a multi -year trend of benefit changes made in an attempt to contain health insurance costs. A portion of the FY12 savings to fund OPEB is proposed as mentioned previously. Beginning in the fall of 2011 the Town conducted an extensive bid process for heath insurance, and the results were very favorable — but still confidential in the details due to ongoing negotiations with the unions. An independent consultant hired to conduct this bid process cited the outstanding results as directly attributable to the excellent management/labor relationship and the prudent financial oversight by the Town. Medicare ($675,000; +3.8 %): After a long history of underfunding this difficult to forecast expense, the MUNIS system was instrumental in properly projecting this beginning in FY10. As predicted last year, the annual rate of increase of this line item has slowed due to ongoing demographic shifts in the workforce. Indemnification ($65,000; +8.3 %): Police & •Fire on duty injury related expenses can vary widely in this line item. Each year the budget is increased in order to be conservative. Capital A recap of FYI capital funding shows: $948,000 voted by April 2011 Town Meeting + $139,500 voted by November 2011 TM + $144,000 requested at April 2012 TM + $331,000 requested at April 2012 TM (40R funds) $1,562,500 The target baseline capital spending per FINCOM policy for FY13 is $1,593,358 (includes $300,000 due to energy savings). This total is noticeably higher than the April 2011 funding above because of a drop in FY13 debt service. The proposed FY13 capital spending is $1,937,700 — an amount higher than suggested by FINCOM because of the use of some additional one -time 40R Smart Growth Stabilization funds. Following is a summary of the proposed in FY13 capital: Capital Funding Sources: $250,000 from the sale of real estate (fund expected to be fully drawn down by FY16 unless replenished by land sales); $367,000 from the OR Smart Growth Stabilization (fund expected to show.a $180,000 balance after a four -year spending plan is completed in FYI 5); $1,320,700 from the general fund. J 0 Capital Projects: $168,000 for Town Facilities: $100,000 DPW cemetery building design; $58,000 for Main St. Fire Station floor repairs; $10,000 windows and doors at the Senior Center; $12,000 for School Facilities: for HVAC systems at Parker; $517,000 for the School Department; $400,000 for possible modular classrooms; $75,000 for network technology projects; $42,000 to replace a 1999 pickup truck; $36,000 for the Fire department to replace a 1996 pickup truck; $1,204,700 for Public Works: $730,000 for road repairs (an additional $600,000 of Chapter 90 grant funds is expected to further increase the total FY13 road repair budget); $135,000 to replace a 1995 sidewalk snow blower; $88,000 in general curb and sidewalk repairs for pedestrian safety; $63,000 to replace a 1993 dump truck in the cemetery division; $48,700 to replace a Parks division Tractor of indeterminate age; $45,000 for the Sturges Park playground; $30,000 for DPW fence replacement; $28,000. to replace a 1993 Toro Leaf -Vac; $20,000 for engineering survey equipment and $17,000 to replace a 1995 cemetery mower. Debt In March 2012 the Town saved almost $5 million in total debt service between FY13 and FY25 by taking advantage of low interest rates and refinancing some old debt. About $0.5 million was saved on behalf of the Massachusetts School Building Authority; another $450,000 was saved inside the tax levy and is available for town capital projects; and $3.9 million was saved for taxpayers outside the tax levy. Inside the tax levy $2.28 million (- $964k from FY12) The Town negotiated a lump sum settlement from the MSBA for the remainder of their share of Coolidge MS debt and then used that to reduce the amount outstanding in a newly refinanced debt issue. The net result in FY13 was a loss of $462,000 in MSBA revenue and a reduction of $577,000 in debt service for a net gain of $115,000. In FY14 debt service on a $1.5 million cemetery garage is scheduled to begin, and in FYI debt service on a $1.5 million DPW building is scheduled to begin. Total savings of $3.86 million for taxpayers will be realized between FY14 and FY25 due to the refinancing. Future large projects considered as debt exclusions include the Public Library renovation ($7 million town share) and the Killam Elementary School renovation ($3 million town share). Regional Vocational Schools A sharp decrease (from 23 students to 16 students) at the Northeast Vocational school results in a 26% reduction in that budget. Based upon final enrollment at Minuteman the FY12 budget was overfunded, so this item is reduced 16% for FY13. J J 05 EXPENSES 19125574 574500 DEDUCT /CLM 0'01 N OF Rto^iNV 3, iviA - 03/30/2012 11:22 INS PREMS OF READING 247,118.70 TOTAL EXPENSES blelacheur 75,000.00 (TOWN NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS PROJECTION: 20131 FY13 General Fund 0913 UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 15,000.00 '- 325,000.00 2011 2012 2012 .00 ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD % 0911 RETIREMENT AND PENSION CONT .00 05 - EXPENSES 325,000.00 .0% 3,082,614.69 19115519 519700 RETR ASSMT' 3,653,365.00 17.9% 2,878,456.00 3,007,986.00 3,007,986.00 3,097,986.00 19115519 519710 NONCONTRIB 17.9% 73,728.36 75,000.00 75,000.00 19115519 519720 OBRA FEES 10,989.00 15,000.00 15,000.00 19115519 519750 OPEB CONTR .00 - .00 .01 19115530 530129 ACTUARIAL .00 .00 .00 TOTAL EXPENSES ' 2,963,173.36 3,097,986.00 3,097,986.01 TOTAL RETIREMENT AND PENSION 2,963,173.36 3,097,986.00 3,097,986.01 0912 WORKERS COMPENSATION 05 EXPENSES 19125574 574500 DEDUCT /CLM 3,007,986.00 7,591.92 19125574 574550 INS PREMS 3.9% 247,118.70 TOTAL EXPENSES 5.0% 75,000.00 254,710.62 TOTAL WORKERS COMPENSATION ' 300,000.00 254,710.62 0913 UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 05 EXPENSES 19135519 519100 19135519 519300 19135530 530000 PG 1 bgnyrpte FOR PERIOD 99 2012 2012 2013 PCT ACTUAL PROJECTION 4- FINCOM CHANGE 3,007,986.00 59,000.00 3,007,986.00 5,040.44 3,125,885.00 25,000.00 3.9% 26,250.00 47,663.19 5.0% 75,000.00 300,000.00 67,500.00 300,000.00 -10.0% 1,740.00 13,465.50 2,500.00 25.0% 15,000.00 15,000.00 325,000.00 .0% 325,000.00 .00 .00 420,000.00 341,250.00 % 13,500.00 325,000.00 .00 25,000.00 325,000.00 .0% 3,082,614.69 3,097,986.00 3,653,365.00 17.9% 3,082,614.69 3,097,986.00 3,653,385.00 17.9% 25,000.00 59,000.00 25,000.00 5,040.44 59,000.00 25,000.00 UNEMP SCH 45,003.53 26,250.00 89,000.00 5.0% 89,000.00 300,000.00 PROF SVCS 2,320.00 300,000.00 275,392.65 1,740.00 300,000.00 2,500.00 25.0% 315,000.00 5.0% 325,000.00 - 325,000.00 280,433.09, 325,000.00 341,250.00 5.0% 325,000.00 325,000.00 280,433.09 325,000.00 341,250.00 5.0% UNEMP TWN 50,241.17 59,000.00 59,000.00 12,771.58 59,000.00 37,500.00 -36.416 UNEMP SCH 45,003.53 89,000.00 89,000.00 39,629.26 89,000.00 60,000.00 -10.1% PROF SVCS 2,320.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 1,740.00 2,000.00 2,500.00 25.0% J N 03/30/2012 11:22 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS ITONN FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL Dt�','N OF 11R, EADINGi, "' ?A OF READING NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION - FOR 2013 4- FINCOM PG 2 bgnyrpte PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE TOTAL EXPENSES 97,564.70 150,000.00 150,000.00 54,140. 84 150,000.00 120,000.00 -20.0$ TOTAL UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSAT 97,564.70 150,000.00 .150,000.00 54,140.84 1501000.00 120,000.00 -20.0% 0914 HEALTH INSURANCE 05 EXPENSES 19145530 530000 PROF SVGS .00 20,000.00 20,000.00 32,000.00 - 20,000.00 40,000.00 100.0$ 19145574 574000 HEALTH INS 7,562,632.22 8,500,000.00 8,500,000.00 5,840,619.90 8,500,000.00 8,400,000.00 -1.2% 19145574 574050 LIFE INS 29,050.86 42,500.00 42,500.00 23,303.76 42,500.00 35,000.00 -17.6$ TOTAL EXPENSES 7,591,683.08 8,562,500.00 8,562,500.00 5,895,923.66 8,562,500.00 8,475,000.00 -1.0$ TOTAL HEALTH INSURANCE 7,591,683.08 8,562,500.00 8,562,500.00 5,895,923.66 8,562,500.00 8,475,000.00 -1.016 0916 MEDICARE 05 EXPENSES 19165519 519000 MEDICARE 556,990.00 650,000.00. 650,000.00 431,506.35 650,000.00 675,000.00 3.8$ TOTAL EXPENSES 556,990.00 650,000.00 650,000.00 431,506.35 650,000.00 675,000.00 3.8$ TOTAL MEDICARE 556,990.00 650,000.00 650,000.00 431,506.35 650,000.00 675,000.00 3.8% 0917 INDEMNIFICATION 111F 05 EXPENSES 19175519 519210 POLC INDEM 11,662.55 30,000.00 30,000.00 12,509.38 30,000.00 32,500.00 8.3$ 19175519 519220 FIRE INDEM 30,462.76 30,000.00 30,000.00 18,584.87 30,000.00 32,500.00 8.3$ TOTAL EXPENSES 42,125.31 60,000.00 60,000.00 31,094.25 60,000.00 65,000.00 8.3$ TOTAL INDEMNIFICATION 111F 42,125.31 60,000.00 60,000.00 31,094.25 60,000.00 65,000.00 8.3$ TOTAL EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 11,506,247.07 12,845,486.00 12,845,486.01 9,775,712.88 12,845,486.00 13,329,635.00 3.8$ GRAND TOTAL J CO Criteria for Evaluating Capital Projects Town of Reading, MA The following criteria are used by the Town Manager to determine priorities for requested Capital projects to be included in the Capital Improvement Program. Guiding principles include: Let's keep our commitments to public good by taking care of what we've inherited to the best of our ability, Let's keep our commitment to future generations by making prudent investments that will enhance the quality of life long term These criteria are not listed in any order. of priority. 1. Project addresses a life health /safety deficiency (example — inadequate fresh air into an office) 2. Project maintains or improves public safety (example — replacement of Police and Fire radios) 3. Project is required to address an inadequacy that makes a particular portion of the infrastructure non - conforming to state or federal law or regulation which is binding upon the Town (example — HC access improvements to a public building) 4. Project will result in substantial and measurable cost savings (example — energy improvements) 5. Project replaces infrastructure that has reached or is about to reach the end of its physical or 4/13/2010 functional life, or the project will prolong the physical or functional life of the infrastructure asset (Example — road improvements) 6. Project is a high priority to the requesting department and is essential to its operation (example — replace stack shelving in the Library) 7. Project takes advantage of one -time or unusual opportunities that benefit the Town of Reading (Example — purchase of a critical parcel of land at a lower price because of a slumping economy) 8. Project leverages Town resources to accomplish a community goal at lower cost to the Town (Example — purchase of a parcel of land a portion of the cost of which is paid for through a one time gift or grant) 9. Project advances a key goal of the community in making an improvement beyond what exists currently (Example — development of an additional elementary school) Note — examples are actual situations that the Town is dealing with currently, or has dealt with in the recent past. J a Dept. FY13 Capital Requests Request Estimate Category Description Source Town Fac. DPW: Cemetery $ 100,000 Design of new Cemetery building Gen'I Fund Town Fac. Main St. Fire Station $ 58,000 Floor repairs Gen'I Fund Town Fac. Windows & doors $, 10,000 Senior Center Gen'I Fund $ 168,000 School Fac. Killam project ( -$5.0 million) ADA issues; main office; windows; gym floor Debt Excl. School Fac. Modular classrooms $ 400,000 two classrooms at location TBD (if needed) Gen'I Fund Schools Technology $ 75,000 wireless access, virtualization projects 40R Schools Vehicle $ 42,000 replace 1999 Chevy pickup Gen'I Fund School Fac. HVAC /Energy: Parker $ 12,000 exhaust fans Gen'I Fund $ 529,000 Fire Pickup Truck (1996- 12yrs) $ 36,000 Gen'I Fund $ 36,000 DPW Roads (local share) $ 450,000 Roads (annual) $250k R/E DPW Roads (one -time 40R) $ 230,000 Roads (extra) 40R DPW Skim Coat/Crack Seal $ 50,000 Annual allocation Gen'I Fund DPW Sidewalk Snow Plow (large) $ 135,000 Gen'I Fund DPW Curb /sidewalk $ 63,000 Pedestrian safety (extra) 40R DPW Curb /sidewalk $ 25,000 Pedestrian safety (annual) Gen'I Fund DPW Dump Truck C2 (1996) $ 63,000 Cemetery division Gen'I Fund DPW .Tractor Ford 445 $ 48,700 Parks division Gen'I Fund DPW Playground $ 45,000 Annual playground (Sturges) Gen'I Fund DPW Fence replacement $ 30,000 DPW garage Gen'I Fund DPW Toro leaf vac (1993) $ 28,000 Gen'I Fund DPW Survey Equipment $ 20,000 Engineering Gen'I Fund DPW Mower SKAG 52" (1995) $ 17,000 Cemetery Gen'I Fund $ 1,204,700 Total Requests $ 1,937,700 Sources of Funding General Fund $ 1,319,700 Gen'I Fund, Sale of Real Estate Fund $ 250,000 R/E 40R Stabilization Fund $ 368,000 40R Total Funding $ 1,937,700 J FY -2012 FY -2013 517,000 12,000 158,000 10,000 - 36,000 - 311,700 75,000 818,000 FY -2014 FY -2015 FY -2016 FY -2017 FY -2018 I FY -2019 FY -2020 FY -2021 FY -2022 FY13.22 Summary Schools - General 50,000 - - 75,000 - - 75,000 - - 75,000 742,000 Buildings• Schools (non Energy) 73,000 118,000 501,000 526,000 154,000 63,000 1,504,000 685,000 - - 3,551,000 Buildings• Schools (Energy) 74,000 12,000 - 42,000 158,000 - 15,000 25,000 26,000 60,000 350,000 Buildings• Muni (non Energy) 167,000 60,000 40,000 327,000 469,000 202,000 280,000 - - - 1,536,000 Buildings - Muni (Energy) 65,000 10,000 65,000 20,000 20,000 15,000 - - - 135,000 275,000 Finance - 60,000 60,000 - - - - 75,000 75,000 - 270,000 Library - - 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 80,000 Public Safety - Fire 14,000 155,000 69,000 654,000 316,500 90,600 180,000 849,000 339,000 - 2,689,100 Public Safety - Police - 10,000 35,000 - - 20,000 - 45,000 - 400,000 500,000 Public Works - Equipment 189,000 72,800 258,100 238,600 412,700 734,500 413,700 570,200 344,600. 343,700 3,700,600 Public Works • Parks & Cemetery 45,000 848,000 465,000 335,600 192,000 560,600 320,000 450,800 1,295,000 428,000 4,970,000 Public Works - Roads 875,500 832,000 741,000 675,000 725,000 775,000 825,000 875,000 925,000 975,000 8,166,000 TOTAL CAPITAL REQUESTS 1,562,500 1,937,700 2,202,800 2,209,100 2,903,200 2,477,200 2,450,700 3,667,700 3,540,000 3,014,600 2,426,700 26,829,700 FINCOM policy: debt +capital 3,533,287 3,688,427 300,000 2,279,765 3,792,125 3,886,928 3,984,101 4,083,704 4,185,796 4,290,441 4,397,702 4,507,645 4,620,336 - 41,437,207 +Allowance for energy savings 300,000 275,000 250,000 225,000 200,000 175,000 150,000 125,000 100,000 75,000 1,875.000 -Net Included Debt 2,807,632 2,050,527 2,298,895 2,102,159 2,014,261 1,905,576 1,236,844 888,675 854,094 824,319 16,455,115 FINCOM Target Capital Funding 1,025,655 1,708,662 2,016,598 1,838,034 2,106,942 2,269,443 2,455,220 3,203,598 3,634,027 3,753,551 3,871,017 26,857,092 Original Funding Voted or Proposed 948,000 1,569,700 368,000 1,937,700 1,945,800 1,800,000 2,050,000 2,200,000 2,400,000 3,150,000 3,600,000 3,700,000 3,800,000 26,215,500 Additional Funding Voted 139,500 - Additional Funding Proposed 40R 331,000 257,000 116,000 741,000 Additional Funding Proposed 144,000 TOTAL CAPITAL REQUESTS 1,562,500 2,202,800 2,209,100 2,903,200 2,477,200 2,450,700 3,667,700 3,540,000 3,014,600 2,426,700 26,829,700 Annual Surplus (Deficit) - - - (293,100) (853,200) (277,200) (50,700) (517,700) 60,000 685,400 1,373,300 Cumulative Surplus (Deficit) - (293,100) (1,146,300) (1,423,500) (1,474,200) (1,991,900) (1,931,900) (1,246,500)1 126,800 -. Sources 1,319,700 General Fund 931,500 1,745,800 1,650,000 1,950,000 2,200,000 2,400,000 3,150,000 3,600,000 3,700,000 3,800,000 25,515,500 Beg. Balance 994,287 704,822 250,000 454,822 454,822 254,622 104,622 4,822 Sale of R1E Fund 300,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 End balance 704,822 254,822 104,622 4,822 Beg. Balance 700,000 678,000 368,000 150,000 200,000 260,000 260,000 153,000 187,000 350k initial each from Downtown 8 Gateway Smart Growth Districts 40R Stabliution Funds 40R 331,000 257,000 116,000 +deposits 309,000 150,000 150,000 159k( Downtown) +150kyr(Gateway) and payments - in progress - transfer to AHTF End balance 678,000 153,000 187,000 OF F 03/30/2012 11:18 (TOWN OF READING blelacheur NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS ' PROJECTION: 20131 FY13 General Fund DEBT SERVICH 2011 2012 2012 ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM PG 1 Ibgnyrpte PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 0700 DEBT SERVICE 05 EXPENSES 17005530 530705 DEBTCOSTS .00 .0$ 1,138.83 .00 .00 .00 .00 TOTAL EXPENSES .0$ 1,138.83 - .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 ` 07 DEBT SERVICE 17007591 591000 LGTMDBT PR 2,595,000.00 2,570,000.00 2,570,000.00 2,570,000.00 2,570,000.00 1,870,000.00 -27.2% 17007591 592000 LGTMDBT IN 749,216.27 699,668.00 699,668.00 645,763.14 699,668.00 409,765.00 -41.416 17007592 591000 LGTMDBT PR 1,570,000.00 1,615,000.00 1,615,000.00 1,615,000.00 1,615,000.00 1,665,000.00 3.1$ Cn 17007592 592000 LGTMDBT IN 1,228,190.02 1,178,778.00 1,178,778.00 1,178,777.52 1,178,778.00 594,810.00 -49.5% 17007593 593100 SHRT INTRS 9,900.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0$ TOTAL DEBT SERVICE 6,152,306.29 6,063,446.00 6,063,446.00 6,009,540.66 6,063,446.00, 4,539,575.00 -25.1$ TOTAL DEBT SERVICE 6,153,445.12 6,063,446.00 6,063,446.00 6,009,540.66 6,063,446.00 4,539,575.00 -25.1$ TOTAL DEBT SERVICE 6,153,445.12 6,063,446.00 6,063,446.00 6,009,540.66 6,063,446.00 4,539,575.00 -25.1$ GRAND TOTAL 6,153,445.12 6,063,446.00 6,063,446.00 6,009,540.66 6,063,446.00 4,539,575.00 -25.1$ *+ END OF REPORT - Generated by Bob LeLacheur ++ J J Town of Reading Approved lRequested Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Debt Service Schedule FY -2012 1 FY -2013 FY -2014 FY -2015 FY -2016 FY -2017 FY -2018 FY -2019 FY -2020 FY -2021 FY -2022 FY -2023 FY -2024 FY -2025 I $ 4131122:09 PM $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ General ' Fund: 6,037,284' 4,539,575 4,380,600 3,775;030 '3,555,757'3;445;159 3,327;574 -- 2,658,391 2i 307, 273 ;2, 257, 231':2,209,994 2,060,030-2,037,611 '336,188' Principal 4,185,000 3,535,000 3,310,000 2,735,000 2,630,000 2,645,000 2,655,000 2,110,000 1,860,000 1,895,000 1,935,000 1,875,000 1,940,000 330,000 Within Levy Limit 2,570,000 1,870,000 1,585,000 1,795,000 1,675,000 1,665,000 1,635,000 1,040,000 740,000 735,000 735,000 635,000 635,000 330,000 Debt Exclusion 1,615,000 1,665,000 1,725,000 940,000 955,000 980,000 1,020,000 1,070,000 1,120,000 1,160,000 1,200,000 1,240,000 1,305,000 0 Interest 1,852,284 1,004,575 1,070,600 1,040,030 925,757 800,159 672,574 548,391 447,273 362,231 274,994 185,030 97,611 6,188 Within Levy Limit 673,506 409,765 465,527 503,895 427,159 349,261 270,576 196,844 148,675 119,094 89,319 58,825 32,881 6,188 Debt Exclusion 1 1,178,778 594,810 605,073 5363136 498,598 450,898 401,998 351,548 298,598 243,138 185,675 126,205 64,730 0 Total Within Levy Limit: 3,243,506 2,279765 2,050,527 2,298,895 2,102,159 2,014,261 1,905,576 1,236,844 888,675 854,094 824,319 693,825 667,881 336,188 Issued 3,243,506 2,279,765 1,653,027 1,523,395 1,365,659 1,316,761 1,247,076 917,344 888,675 854,094 824,319 693,825 667,881 336,188 Approved not issued 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 -0 0 - 0 0 0 Not approved 0 0 397,500 .775,500 736,500 697,500 658,500 319,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 MSBA share(Coolidge) 462,036 0 0 0 Net Included Debt 2,781470 23279,765 2,050,527 2298,895 2,102,159 2,014,261 1,905576 1,236844 888,675 854,094 824,319 693,825 667,881 336,188 Refinencirichand :',,:26163'x(115303 '(11Z650) '(161,394) (144,088)"'(117,582), --(96,325)-,:(75,069):- 53813`.7'32557. 458,700-.. '0 �0' 0 Total Debt Exclusion: 2,7933778 2,259,810 2,330,073 1,476,136 1,453,598 1,430,898 1,421,998 1,421,548 1,418,598 1,403,138 1,385,675 1,366,205 1,369,730 0 Issued 2,793,778 12,259,810 2,3303073 1,4763136 1,453,598 1,430,898 1,421,998 1,421,548 1,418,598 1,403,138 1,385,675 1,366,205 1,369,730 0 MSBA share est. 722,014 1 215,828 817,305 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Net Excluded Debt 2,071764 12,043,982 1,512,768 1,476,136 1453,598 1,430,898 1,4213998 13421548 13418598 1403138 1,385675 1366,205 1369,730 0 'Refinancing change: .,..`: - -- 0?-=- 2006' "499005.- 498930 ".467746 (435,598)-;(404,850) (3fi6,,255)--(327,026)-; (283,622 140404 197111 143134 ) '0 -` Debt Summary (net of MSBA reimbursements) 3,563,295 3,775,030 3,555,757 3,445,159 3,3273574 2,658,391 2,307,273 2,257,231 2,209,994 23060,030 2,037,611 336,188 Net Included +Excluded 4,853,234 4,323,747 School Buildings 3,126,209 2,907,384 2,294,590 2,145,003 2,086,816 2,033,499 1,976,166 1,810,229 1,794,079 1,764,844 1,733,538 1,699,918 1,689,255 0 Town Buildings 420,000 0 397,500 775,500 736,500 697,500 658,500 319,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 Energy /Green Repair 467,850 598,375 595,050 585,350 574,231 561,275 545,388 528,663 513,194 492,388 476,456 360,113 348,356 336,188 4,014,059 3,505,759 3,287,140 3,505,853 3,397,548 3,292,274 3,180,054 2,658,391 2,307,273 2,257,231 2,209,994 2,060,030 2,037,611 336,188 Recreation 178,565 172,855 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Equipment 292,710 285,170 199,130 194,590 86,100 83,660 81,220 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Roads 81,900 79,463 77,025 74,588 72,109 69,225 66,300 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Technology 286,000 280,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 839,175 817988 276,155 269,178 158,209 152,885 147,520 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Excluded outside of Pro 2.112 Debt Summary - - Current: RMHS, Wd End 8 Barrows 2,043,982 1,512,768 1,476,136 1,4533598 1,430,898 1,4213998 1,421,548 13418,598 1,403,138 1,385,675 1,366,205 13369,730 Current! $400k SF home 219 162 158 156 153 152 152 152 150 148 146 147 Estimate for Library - localshom$7mil of$12mil 970,049 970,049 970,049 970,049 970,049 970,049 970,049 970,049 970,049 970,049 LIBRARY per $400R SF home 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 Estimate for Killam- local sham$3mil of$5mil 415,735 415,735 415,735 415,735 415,735 415,735 415,735 415,735 415,735 415,735 ' Killam per $400k SF home 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 s TOWN OF RFADING, 11\1 , 03/30/2012 11:26 ITONN OF READING blelacheur NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS PROJECTION: 20131 FY13 General Fund REGIONAL SCHOOL ASSESSMENTS 2011 2012 2012 ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 0840 REGIONAL SCHOOL ASSESSMENTS 05 EXPENSES 18405532 532130 NSVOKE 327,946.00 18405532 532150 MINUTEMAN 26,475.00 TOTAL EXPENSES 354,421.00 TOTAL REGIONAL SCHOOL ASSESS 354,421.00 TOTAL REGIONAL SCHOOL ASSESS 354,421.00 GRAND TOTAL 354,421.00 2012 ACTUAL 270,692.00 270,692.00 202,545.75 148,651.00 148,651.00 60,219.16 419,343.00 419,343.00 262,764.91 419,343.00 419, 343.00 262,764.91 419,343.00 419,343.00 262,764.91 419,343.00 419,343.00 262,764.91 ** END OF REPORT - Generated by Bob LeLacheur ** 2012 PROJECTION 270,692.00 148,651.00 419,343.00 419,343.00 419,343.00 419,343.00 PG 1 bgnyrpte FOR PERIOD 99 2013 PCT 4- FINCOM CHANGE 200,000.00 -26.1% 125,000.00 -15.9% 325,000.00 -22.5% 325,000.00 -22.5% 325,000.00 -22.5% 325,000.00 -22_5% J co State Assessments Town Meeting does not vote on these charges, they are deducted from any State Aid payments the Town receives. The FY13 budget uses the figures from the Governor's budget released in January 2012. Here are some details: MBTA ($522,885 +10.7 %) To maintain and operate regional public transportation for services rendered to communities within the Authority. Assessments are apportioned based on weighted population shares of the MBTA district, using data from the 7/1/04 U.S. census estimates. Education ($65,453 - 23.2 %) Charter School Tuition ($42,978) to pay for students that attend a charter school district. Assessments use October 1s' enrollment plus expected growth, and are finalized using April I" data; Essex Agricultural School ($12,475) one student chose to attend this school instead of one of the vocational schools listed above; School Choice Tuition, ($10,000) to pay for students attending another school district under School Choice. Assessments are based on October 1" enrollments and updated on April 1st; Special Education Assessments (none) to partially reimburse the state for students enrolled in state hospital schools. Assessments are based on full -time equivalency in special education programs from the previous year. Registry of Motor Vehicles Surcharge ($13,260 -5.2 %) to reimburse the RMV for marking a license or registration for non- renewal due to non - payment of parking violations, excise taxes, and abandoned vehicle costs. Assessments are based on prior year actual expenses. Metropolitan Area Planning Council ($7,796 +9.0 %) to promote urban planning and to respond to common urban problems of Boston and surrounding communities. Assessments are determined by 2004 population. Air Pollution Districts ($7,685 +5.5 %) to pay for the costs incurred by the Department of Environmental Protection in monitoring air pollution levels and enforcing air quality standards at industrial, commercial and institutional facilities. Assessments are determined 50% by 2004 population and 50% by 2004 community assessed values. 03/30/2012 11:30 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 STATE ASSESSMENTS (NEXT FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL TOWN OF READINIG. ivl,a TOWN OF READING YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM PG 1 Ibgnyrpte PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 0820 STATE ASSESSMENTS 05 EXPENSES 18205563 563100 SCH CH TUI 11,344.00 13,500.00 13,500.00 3,334.00 13,500.00 ' 10,000.00 -25.9% 18205563 563110 CHARTERSCH - 42,978.00 60,984.00- 26.00 26.00 13,083.00 26.00 .0% 18205563 563115 ESSEXAGGI .00 61,452.00 61,452.00 .00 61,452.00 12,475.00 -79.7% 18205563 563120 RMV NON RE 13,980.00 13,980.00 13,980.00 6,750.00 13,980.00 13,260.00 -5.2% 18205563 563130 - AIR POLLUT 7,053.00 7,286.00 7,286.00 3,644.00 7,286.00 7,685.00 5.5% 18205563 563140 MAPC 6,950.00 7,154.00 7,154.00 3,578.00 7,154.00 7,796.00 9.0% 18205563 563150 OD MBTA 470,185.00 472,315.00 472,315.00 236,158.00 472,315.00 522,885.00 10.7% O 18205563 563170 SPED ASSMN 9,435.00 10,183.00 10,183.00 .00 10,183.00 .00 - 100.0% - TOTAL EXPENSES 579,931.00 585,896.00 585,896.00 266,547.00 585,896.00 617,079.00 5.3% TOTAL STATE ASSESSMENTS 579,931.00 585,896.00 585,896.00 266,547.00 585,896.00 617,079.00 5.3% TOTAL STATE ASSESSMENTS 579,931.00 585,896.00 585,896.00 266,547.00 585,896.00 617,079.00 5.3% GRAND TOTAL 579,931.00 585,896.00 585,896.00 266,547.00 585,896.00 617,079.00 5.3% ** END OF REPORT - Generated by Bob LeLacheur ** Town Government FY13 Budgets Budget. Process In October 2010 operating budget cuts of 2% were forecast for FY12, despite the use of $1.5 million from cash reserves. Ultimately a combination of higher revenues and lower accommodated costs lowered the use of reserves to under $0.9 million and improved the cuts to only 0.5 %. The Finance Committee's Financial Forum in October 2011 showed an improving but still challenging outlook. After accounting for all expected revenues (without using any free cash) and accommodated costs for FY13, the departmental operating budgets would need to be reduced by 1 %. In light of the continued strong reserves position and the lingering difficulties from the previous budget cuts, the Finance Committee voted again to use up to $1.5 million in cash reserves to support the FY13 budget, changing the outlook to a 2% increase in operating budgets. Since then the revenue picture has improved by about $350,000 (or 0.4 %). The Board of Assessors voted to release about $250,000 more than was estimated in overlay surplus net of additional abatements and exemptions, and meals tax receipts are trending higher. In addition, the forecast for Accommodated costs declined by over $800,000 (out of district Special Education $515,000; energy costs $225,000' and Vocational Education $84,000). As a result of these changes, the $1.15 million in newly available funds were split into two approximately equal parts: - $550,000 was directed towards Community Priorities including almost $400,000 towards substance abuse prevention efforts in the Schools ($280,000) and the Police department ($115,000). In addition, $150,000 for school technology staffing and equipment and some small expenses in conservation were included.; - $600,000 was directed towards the operating budgets (Schools $400,000 and Town Government $200,000), which now show a 3.6% increase instead of a 2% increase. At the same time, the projected use of Free Cash has declined to $1.0 million as a result of the Health Insurance bid process as was explained in the previous section on Employee Benefits. The initial +2% outlook required the Town Government to cut $302,000 from a level service budget for FY13, much less than the $600,000 needed a year before but still a difficult task. It was clear immediately that Public Safety budgets could not be 5 held to a 2% increase as projected wages costs exceeded that figure and there was no appetite to reduce the number of employees. On the other hand some other Town departments did not need the full 2% to continue their operations. The improved +3.6% outlook restored about $200,000 to the Town operating budgets. Here are. the total budgets for the Town departments for FY13. This includes both the +3.6% operating budgets plus the accommodated costs. Department FY12 FY13 Change Administration $680,791 $708,629 +4.1% Accounting $158,079 $160,809 +1.7% Finance $1,547,426 $1,616,783 +4.5% FINCOM Reserves $150,000 $150,000 0.0% Community Services $1,122,479 $1,135,332 +1.1% Library $1,241,530 $1,290,579 +4.0% Public Works $5,367,374 $5,454,347 +1.6% Public Safety $7,961,283 $8,470,477 +6.4% TOTAL $18,378,962 $19,136,956 +4.1% In FY13 this budget includes a 2% increase for non -union employees, and abides by previously negotiated union contracts. For the two Police unions, assumptions have been made because the collective bargaining process is still ongoing. Following are the changes to positions in this budget: Finance - reduction of 0.5 FTE as water /sewer /storm water and collector's clerical duties are combined; DPW - addition of a part-time seasonal employee for the Parks division; Police - addition of the RCASA positions plus one new officer. Below is a summary of the employment by Town department. Note that seasonal employees in Public Works are not counted as FTEs. Department FY09 FY10 I FY11 FY12 FY13 Administration 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.3 Accounting 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 Finance 18.3 19.6 19.6 19.0 18.5 Comm. Services 19.2 17.5 16.9 15.0 15.0 Library 19.7 19.7 19.7 19.7 19.7 Public Works 43.5 43.0 43.0 42.0 42.0 Public Safety 101.8 101.8 101.8 101.4 103.5 TOTAL 207.5 206.5 205.9 201.9 203.5 The following detailed budget sections describe each Town Government department. Any expected changes in service to the community are highlighted, with a discussion of both the wage and expense line items. Town Administration FY13 Budget Overview The Town Administration department funds and administers town -wide programs such as property & casualty insurance and legal expenses. For the town government it also oversees most postage expenses and some equipment maintenance. Finally, it contains all expenses for the Board of Selectmen and the Town Manager and staff. The FY13 budget is increased by 4.1% compared to the previous year. Staffing (2.3 FTEs; unchanged) Wage costs ($217,279; +2.2 %) Salary increases of 2% are included in this budget. Overtime is increased due to the demand for Minutes from night meetings. The elimination of a 16- hour /week Administrative Secretary last year was handled by sharing an existing Administrative Assistant in the Community Services department. The office has benefitted greatly from document storage. Expenses ($491,350; +4.9 %) Non - insurance expenses actually decrease in the FY13 budget, led by another small decline in legal expenses. Note that the school department is reimbursing all legal costs associated with the RMHS construction litigation. Property & Casualty Insurance premiums are expected to increase about 5% and recent claims data has suggested an increase for FY13. No early word has been received about an early payment discount, so that is not included in this budget. In addition, the Town typically earns over $25,000 in premiums credits through the "MIIA Rewards" risk management program, designed to minimize losses. These rewards are not guaranteed, so they are not part of the budget as an offset. If earned, they will flow to free cash as unbudgeted revenues. FY12 FY13 Change Selectmen $1,600 $1,600 0% Town Mgr $291,191 $300,029 +3.0% Legal $72,000 $67,000 -6.9% P &C Insur. $316,000 $340,000 +7.6% TOTAL $680,791 $708,629 +4.1% Staffing (2.3 FTEs; unchanged) Wage costs ($217,279; +2.2 %) Salary increases of 2% are included in this budget. Overtime is increased due to the demand for Minutes from night meetings. The elimination of a 16- hour /week Administrative Secretary last year was handled by sharing an existing Administrative Assistant in the Community Services department. The office has benefitted greatly from document storage. Expenses ($491,350; +4.9 %) Non - insurance expenses actually decrease in the FY13 budget, led by another small decline in legal expenses. Note that the school department is reimbursing all legal costs associated with the RMHS construction litigation. Property & Casualty Insurance premiums are expected to increase about 5% and recent claims data has suggested an increase for FY13. No early word has been received about an early payment discount, so that is not included in this budget. In addition, the Town typically earns over $25,000 in premiums credits through the "MIIA Rewards" risk management program, designed to minimize losses. These rewards are not guaranteed, so they are not part of the budget as an offset. If earned, they will flow to free cash as unbudgeted revenues. 03/30/2012 11:34 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 TOWN ADMINISTRATION ' INEXT FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL _> N 0F.REt�DIN PVi,n TOWN OF READING YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM PG 1 Ibgnyrpts PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 0122 SELECTMEN O5 EXPENSES 11225530 530100 ADVERTISNG 2,738.08 1,200.00 1,200.00 1,201.21 1,200.00 _ 1,200.00. .0% 11225542 542000 OFFC SUPPL 207.68 .00 .00 .0000 .00 .0% 11225578 578000 OTHER EXPN 1,221.49 400.00 400.00 224.12 400.00 400.00 .0% TOTAL EXPENSES 4,167.25 1,600.00 1,600.00 1,425.33 1,600.00 1,600.00 .0% TOTAL SELECTMEN 4,167.25 1,600.00 1,600.00 1,425.33 1,600.00 1,600.00 .0% 0123 TOWN MANAGER 00 ? 03 SALARIES 11233511 511000 TOWN MGR " 130,201.24 132,700.00 132,700.00 96,973.10 132,700.00 135,375.00 2.0% 11233511 511002 OFFICE MGR 56,948.21 58,040.00 58,040.00 42,251.32 58,040.00 59,260.00 2.1% 11233511 511011 ADMIN SECR " 9,294.91 13,371.00 13,371.00 9,726.51 13,371.00 13,644.00, 2.04 11233511 515000 OVERTIME 3,529.51 3,500.00 3,500.00 2,983.92 3,500.00 4,000.00 14.3% 11233512 512000 WAGES TEMP 4,504.60 5,000.00 5,000.00 3,620.08 5,000.00 5,000.00 .0% 11233517 517017 SICK LEAVE 3,580.69 .00 .00 .00. .00 .00 .0% TOTAL SALARIES 208,059.16 212,611.00 212,611.00 155,554.93 212,611.00 217,279.00 2.2% 05 EXPENSES 11235524 524900 EQUIP RPR 828.00 850.00 850.00 809.95 850.00 850.00 .0% 11235530 530105 PRINTING " 1,931.17 4,900.00 4,900.00 915.00 4,900.00 3,000.00 - 38.8% 11235531 531000 PRDEV TRN 15.00 3,000.00 3,000.00 .00 3,000.00 2,500.00 -16.7% E D3/30/2012 11:34 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 TOWN ADMINISTRATION ' INEXT FY13 General,Fund 2011 ACTUAL T,G,,WN OF Fcr.DIN, G, iviA TOWN OF READING YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM PG 2 bgnyrpte PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 11235531 531010 PRDEV DUES 6,447.23 5,730.00 5,730.00 6,668.60 5,730.00 6,500.00 13.491 11235531 531090 PRDEV REG 1,454.88 1,100.00 1,100.00 459.00 1,100.00 1,500.00 36.4$ 11235542 542125 COPY SUPP 7,274.84 .00 .00 3,831.86 .00 7,000.00 .0% 11235542 542126 COPY LEASE ' 9,573.47 20,000.00 20,000.00 13,133.57 20,000.00 17,400.00 -13.0% 11235542 542127 POSTAGE " 30,831.96 33,000.00 33,000.00 29,501.71 33,000.00 34,000.00 3.0% 11235578 578000 OTHER EXPN 7,775.79 10,.000.00 15,000.00 11,189.65 10,000.00 10,000.00 -33.3% TOTAL EXPENSES 66,132.34 78,580.00 83,580.00 66,509.34 78,580.00 82,750.00 -1.0% TOTAL TOWN MANAGER 274,191.50 291,191.00 296,191.00 222,064.27 291,191.00 300,029.00 1.3% OD 0151 LAW CA 05 EXPENSES 11515530 530110 LEGAL CNSL 38,733.93 60,000.00 60,000.00 30,420.82 60,000.00 55,000.00 -8.3% 11515530 530115 LABOR CNSL 18,001.61 12,000.00 12,000.00 6,685.68 12,000.00 12,000.00 .0% 11515578 578009 RECORDING 75.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0$ TOTAL EXPENSES 56,810.54 72,000.00 " 72,000.00 37,106.50 72,000.00 67,000.00 -6.9% TOTAL LAW 56,810.54 72,000.00 72,000.00 37,106.50 72,000.00 67,000.00 -6.9$ 0193 PROPERTY INSURANCE 05 EXPENSES 11935574 574010 P &C INSUR 275,225.80 300,000.00 300,000.00 306,888.55 300,000.00 315,000.00 5.0% 11935574 574500 DEDUCT /CLM 2,827.57 16,000.00 30,150.69 19,392.70 16,000.00 - 25,000.00 -17.1% TOTAL EXPENSES 275,053.37 316,000.00 330,150.69 326,281.25 316,000.00 340,000.00 3.0% TOTAL PROPERTY INSURANCE 278,053.37 316,000.00 330,150.69 326,281.25 316,000.00 340,000.00 3.0 %' TOTAL TOWN ADMINISTRATION 613,222.66 680,791.00 699,941.69 586,877.35 680,791.00 708,629.00 1.2% GRAND TOTAL Accounting FY13 Budget Overview The Accounting Department, under the direction of the Town Accountant, is responsible for maintaining financial records. These records facilitate the preparation of financial reports and schedules that provide meaningful, accurate information for comparability and for management's decision making process. The Accounting Department ensures that all financial transactions are in compliance with legal requirements and are properly recorded on a timely basis. Staffing (2.45 FTEs; unchanged) Wage costs $159,709 ( +1.9 %) The Accounting Department and is made up of the following employees: one full -time Town Accountant; one 30 -hour per week (0.8 FTE) Accounts Payable clerk; one 20 -hour per week (0.55) Administrative Clerk; and one 3.75 -hours per week (0.1) Assistant Accountant. (This is the full time Retirement Board Administrator who does some work for the Town Accountant) for a total of 2.45 FTE employees. A 2% wage increase is funded with this budget. Overtime has been reduced because the MUNIS software implementation is complete. No adjustments are made for an expected retirement in June 2012 of the current Town Accountant. The search process for a replacement will begin in the first quarter of calendar 2012. Expenses $1,100 (- 15.4 %) The FY13 budget trims the few expenses found in this department. About half of the supplies budget is spent on records retention requirements. Professional development includes dues and registration that keeps the department up to date on current accounting issues and qualifies for credits to maintain the CPA status. While it does not impact this budget, the department has reduced postage and paper costs in other departments by using electronic invoices and internal reports. FY12 FY13 Change Wages $156,799 $159,709 +1.9% Expenses $1,300 $1,100 - 15:4% Total $158,079 $160,809 +1.7% Staffing (2.45 FTEs; unchanged) Wage costs $159,709 ( +1.9 %) The Accounting Department and is made up of the following employees: one full -time Town Accountant; one 30 -hour per week (0.8 FTE) Accounts Payable clerk; one 20 -hour per week (0.55) Administrative Clerk; and one 3.75 -hours per week (0.1) Assistant Accountant. (This is the full time Retirement Board Administrator who does some work for the Town Accountant) for a total of 2.45 FTE employees. A 2% wage increase is funded with this budget. Overtime has been reduced because the MUNIS software implementation is complete. No adjustments are made for an expected retirement in June 2012 of the current Town Accountant. The search process for a replacement will begin in the first quarter of calendar 2012. Expenses $1,100 (- 15.4 %) The FY13 budget trims the few expenses found in this department. About half of the supplies budget is spent on records retention requirements. Professional development includes dues and registration that keeps the department up to date on current accounting issues and qualifies for credits to maintain the CPA status. While it does not impact this budget, the department has reduced postage and paper costs in other departments by using electronic invoices and internal reports. 0135 TOWN ACCOUNTANT 03 SALARIES TOVVN OF PN EADI Env. v] 03/30/2012 11:36 TOWN ACCT. TOWN OF READING blelachaur 11353511 NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS PROJECTION: 20131 FY13 General Fund ' ACCOUNTING 511010 ADMIN ASST " 2011 - 2012 2012 2012 2012 CLERK ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD ACTUAL PROJECTION 0135 TOWN ACCOUNTANT 03 SALARIES 98,911.00 11353511 511001 TOWN ACCT. 98,911.00 96,970.50 11353511 511006 RET ADMIN 5,370.00 5,260.10 11353511 511010 ADMIN ASST " 26,093.88 11353511 511012 CLERK 26,615.00 " 26,564.04 11353511 515000 OVERTIME 26,615.00 00 TOTAL SALARIES 2. - 25,383.00 154,888.52 00 18,478.66 J 05 EXPENSES 11355531 531000 PRDEV TRN 500.00 310.00 11355531 531090 PRDEV REG .00 500.00 77.50 11355531 531091 PRDEV TRAV Ot 156,779.00 54.06 11355542 542000 OFFC SUPPL 156,779.00 226.83 TOTAL EXPENSES 1.9% 668.39 TOTAL TOWN ACCOUNTANT 750.50 155,556.91 TOTAL ACCOUNTING 750.50 - 600.00 155,556.91 -20.1% GRAND TOTAL 155,556.91 IPG 1 bgnyrpte FOR PERIOD 99 2013 PCT 4- FINCOM CHANGE 98,911.00 98,911.00 71,948.34 98,911.00 100,890.00 2.0% 5,370.00 5,370.00 3,903.09 5,370.00 5,474.00 1.9t 26,615.00 26,615.00 19,357.20 26,615.00 27,141.00 2. OW 25,383.00 25,363.00 18,478.66 25,383.00 25,904.00 2.196 500.00 500.00 .00 500.00 300.00 -40. Ot 156,779.00 156,779.00 113,687.29 156,779.00 159,709.00 1.9% 750.50 750.50 275.00 750.50 - 600.00 -20.1% .00 .00 .00 - .00 150.00 .0% 150.00 150.00 .00 150.00 100.00 -33.3% 400.00 400.00 106.26 400.00 250.00 -37.5% 1,300.50 1,300.50 381.26 1,300.50 1,100.00 -15.4% 158,079.50 158,079.50 114,068.55 156,079.50 160,809.00 1.7% 158,079.50 158,079.50 114,068.55 158,079.50 160,809.00 1.7% 158,079.50 158,079.50 114,068.55 158,079.50 160,809.00 1.7% ** END OF REPORT - Generated by Bob LeLacheur ** " 8 Finance Department FY13Budget The Finance Department's FY13 budget is increased by 4.7% when compared to the previous year. Three factors drive most of this increase; otherwise the budget is up only 0.5 %: + $24,000 to outsource inspections for the assessors; + $21,500 software license moved from Public Safety; . + $17,060 in costs due to additional elections. Even with these factors, the FY13 budget still remains below FYI 1 levels after a 6.5% reduction last year: Overview Assessors: Assessment of property is the first step in the process of tax revenue collection for the Town of Reading. The Assessment Division's function is to provide for the fair and equitable assessment of all taxable real and personal property. A three - member elected Board of Assessors sets policy for this division. General Finance: Collections is responsible for collecting all taxes and other charges (including ambulance and water /sewer /storm water bills). They also receive and process all deposits (such as schools and recreation). Treasury is responsible for providing the cash for the operation of all Town, School and Light Department functions on a timely basis. In addition, it conducts all borrowing and investing activities, including those on behalf of the Town's Trust Funds (at the direction of the Trust Fund Commissioners). Human resources: This division supports the Town (under the direction of the Town Manager), Schools (under the direction of the Superintendent), Light Department (under the direction of the RMLD General Manager) and Retiree benefit activities. Technology: The Technology Division provides centralized computer- network and telecommunications services as well as distributed internet, audio /video, software and personal computer support and geographic information systems (GIS) mapping for the municipal government (Town Hall, the Library, the Senior Center, Police, Fire /Emergency Management, Public Works, Water and Sewer). This division also coordinates many technology activities with both the School and Light Departments. Town Clerk: The Town Clerk is guided by Federal, State, and local laws and policies in overseeing Elections, voter registration, the census process, Town Meeting, and local licenses as well as historic and legal documents for the Town. FY12 FY13 Change FINCOM $52,400 $51,400 -1.9% Assessors $139,941 $166,782 +19.1% Finance $576,358 $569,681 -1.2% Human Res. $85,251 $86,809 +1.8% Technology $532,363 $564,761 +6.1% Town Clerk $109,657 $111,334 +1.5% Elections $51,456 $69,016 1 +34.1% TOTAL $1,547,426 $1,619,783 1 +4.7% Assessors: Assessment of property is the first step in the process of tax revenue collection for the Town of Reading. The Assessment Division's function is to provide for the fair and equitable assessment of all taxable real and personal property. A three - member elected Board of Assessors sets policy for this division. General Finance: Collections is responsible for collecting all taxes and other charges (including ambulance and water /sewer /storm water bills). They also receive and process all deposits (such as schools and recreation). Treasury is responsible for providing the cash for the operation of all Town, School and Light Department functions on a timely basis. In addition, it conducts all borrowing and investing activities, including those on behalf of the Town's Trust Funds (at the direction of the Trust Fund Commissioners). Human resources: This division supports the Town (under the direction of the Town Manager), Schools (under the direction of the Superintendent), Light Department (under the direction of the RMLD General Manager) and Retiree benefit activities. Technology: The Technology Division provides centralized computer- network and telecommunications services as well as distributed internet, audio /video, software and personal computer support and geographic information systems (GIS) mapping for the municipal government (Town Hall, the Library, the Senior Center, Police, Fire /Emergency Management, Public Works, Water and Sewer). This division also coordinates many technology activities with both the School and Light Departments. Town Clerk: The Town Clerk is guided by Federal, State, and local laws and policies in overseeing Elections, voter registration, the census process, Town Meeting, and local licenses as well as historic and legal documents for the Town. R Staffing (18.5 FTEs; -0.5 FTE) Wage costs $1,108,433; +1.8 %) Three components of the increase in wages included a 2% raise for all employees; an increase in election wages due to one additional election which costs +1.6 %; offset by reductions due to a -0.5 FTE change in clerical staffing. Wages FY12 FY13 Change Assessors $130,441 $133,032 +2.0% Finance $496,858 $487,181 -1.9% Human Res. $77,251 $78,809 +2.0% Technology $253,063 $258,561 +2.2% Town Clerk $108,657 $110,834 +2.0% Elections $22,956 $40,016 +74.3% TOTAL $1,089,226 108,433 +1.8% Last year the Finance department examined three of four Town Hall departments in order to create some staffing /scheduling changes. Due to a retirement, the fourth department (Public Works) was examined in the fall 2011 and a water /sewer clerical position was assumed by current Finance department staff. The FY13 budget eliminates 0.5 FTE of the prior two full -time positions. Finance staff have made improvements to internal processes and offered water /sewer customers a one -stop location to pay bills, raise questions and schedule appointments which has allowed this reduction in staffing. Customer service levels have remained high despite the changes over the past two years caused by budget reductions. Further advances in technology are expected to keep these service levels high despite that reduction in staffing. FTEs FY11 FY12 FY13 Technology 4.0 4.0 4.0 Assessor 3.9 3.6 3.6 Collector 3.6 3.3 2.8 Treasury 3.2 3.2 3.2 Town Clerk 2.9 3.0 3.0 Human Resources 2.0 2.0 2.0 TOTAL 19.6 19.0 18.5 Expenses ($511,350; +11.6 %) Most of the increase is due to a combination of the $24,000 outsourcing of assessing inspections and the $21,500 software charge moved from the Public Safety budget. Last year the seasonal appraiser was replaced by a need to hire a consultant every three years to assist with the revaluation process. At that time staff was caught up on the nine -year requirement to attempt to inspect every dwelling in the town. Since then the Board of Assessors has requested spending $24,000 /year over the next three -years (FY12 through FY14) to outsource the bulk of inspections while they convert to a new software system. After those three years this annual expense will decline to under $10,000. 8 There are slight increases in several professional development expenses reflecting a partial recovery from cuts made last year. Most general finance expenses are level funded, although an exception is made for an expected increase in postal rates. Staff is examining a new system brought in by the Light Department that will allow more electronic interaction with the general public, and will implement it only if no new net costs are incurred. A supplies expense is moved from Assessors to Finance to simplify the acquisition process. Expenses FY12 FY13 Change FINCOM $52,400 $51,400 -1.9% Assessors $9,500 $33,750 +250.8% Finance $79,500 $82,500 +3.8% Human Res. $8,000 $8,000 0.0% Technology $279,300 $306,200 +9.6% Town Clerk $1,000 $500 1 -50.0% Elections $28,500 1 $29,000 +1.8% TOTAL $458,200 1 $511,350 +11.6% Technology expenses are up 9.6% primarily because of a $21,500 software license moved over from the Public Safety budget. A total of eleven software licenses are now part of the annual budget, representing a significant cost of $187,200 in FY13. This represents the culmination of the $1.25 million investment made by Town Meeting in 2007 to improve technology systems over a five -year period. Thus far most improvements are internal, but several will become evident to the public during the next year. Internal systems (66 %): MUNIS financial system ($78,750); Public Safety ($21,500); Document Storage ($14,700); Desktop software ($7,000); and the ADMINS financial system ($1,900). Public systems (34 %): License & Permits ($22,100) to be launched in mid -2012; GIS mapping ($12,750) also serves as basis for many integrated systems; Reading Community Alerts Communications ($12,600); Assessors ($7,500) to be launched in late 2012; Website ($7,000) with some improvements scheduled for late -2012; and an online cemetery system ($1,400). Regional technology collaborative efforts are also being discussed, but at this time there are no expected FY13 budget impacts. 0131 FINANCE COMMITTEE 05 - EXPENSES 0,A,NO F REAC 1N G, \1A 03/30/2012 11:36 11315530 OF READING FINL AUDIT blelacheur (TOWN NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS PROJECTION: 20131 FY13 General Fund 11315531 FINANCE PRDEV TEN .02 52,400.00 2011 2012 2012 2012 52,400.00 ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD ACTUAL 0131 FINANCE COMMITTEE 05 - EXPENSES 51,000.00 52,000.00 11315530 530130 FINL AUDIT -1.9% 400.00 51,000.00 52,000.00 400.00 11315531 531000 PRDEV TEN .02 52,400.00 329.04 400.00 52,400.00 TOTAL EXPENSES - 52,400.00 51,329.04 52,400.00 52,400.00 TOTAL FINANCE COMMITTEE -1.9% 81,683.00 51,329.04 52,400.00 81,683.00 0141 BOARD OF ASSESSORS 2.O% 03 SALARIES 35,482.50 , 48,758.00 co 49,721.00 2.0% 11413511 511003 APPRAISER .00 .00 80,774.07 81,683.00 .0% 11413511 511008 ASST APPR .00 .00 48,338.79 48,758.00 .0% 11413511 511147 ASSOC APPR 130,441.00 133,032.00 16,978.68 .00 11413511 515000 OVERTIME .00 1,932.24 .00 .08 TOTAL SALARIES .00 .00 24,000.00 148,023.98 130,441.00 .0% 05 EXPENSES .00 11415524 524900 LIC ASSESS .0% 5,000.00 1,948.49 .00 5,000.00 11415530 530000 INSPECTION .0% 250.00 .00 .00 250.00 11415530 530190 REVAL 100.0& 500.00 4,966.16 .00 500.00 11415530 530191 APPRSL SVC 50.0% .00 5,000.00 11415531 531000 PROFESSION 638.18 250.00 11415531 531010 DUES /MEMB 823.00 500.00 IPG 1 bgnyrpts FOR PERIOD 99 2012 2013 PCT PROJECTION 4- FINCOM CHANGE 52,000.00 51,000.00 52,000.00 51,000.00 -1.9% 400.00 268.00 400.00 400.00 .02 52,400.00 51,268.00 52,400.00 51,400.00 -1.9% 52,400.00 51,268.00 52,400.00 51,400.00 -1.9% 81,683.00 59,465.32 81,683.00 83,311.00 2.O% 48,758.00 35,482.50 48,758.00 49,721.00 2.0% .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 130,441.00 94,947.82 130,441.00 133,032.00 2.0% .00 1,900.00 .00 .00 .08 .00 .00 .00 24,000.00 .0% .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 5,000.00 .00 5,000.00 5,000.00 .0% 250.00 1,925.08 250.00 500.00 100.0& 500.00 655.00 500.00 750.00 50.0% OWN OF READING, NIA 03/30/2012 11:36 TOWN OF READING PG 2 blelacheur NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS bgnyrpte PROJECTION: 20131 FY13 General Fund FOR PERIOD 99 FINANCE 2011 2012 2012 2012 2012 2013 PCT ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD ACTUAL PROJECTION 4- FINCOM CHANGE 11415531 531050 PUBLCTNS 1,341.46 1,500.00 1,500.00 1,213.80 1,500.00 2,250.00 50.0% 11415531'531091 PROF DEV 1,201.14 250.00 250.00 798.97 250.00 250.00 .0% 11415542 542000 OFFC SUPPL 152.96 1,000.00 1,000.00 186.98 1,000.00 .00 - 100.0% 11415571 571000 MILEAGE " 470.97 1,000.00 1,121.38 731.66 1,000.00 11000.00 -10.8% TOTAL EXPENSES 11,544.38 91500.00 9,621.38 7,411.49 9,500.00 33,750.00 250.8% TOTAL BOARD OF ASSESSORS 159,568.36 139,941.00 140,062.38 102,359.31 139,941.00 166,782.00 19.116 0145 FINANCE 03 SALARIES _ to 11453511 511001 ATM /FINDIR N 95,070.35 96,897.00 96,897.00 70,537.50 96,897.00 98,,834.00 2.0% 11453511 511005 TREAS /COLL ' 75,519.53 76,971.00 76,971.00 56,031.00 76,971.00 78,515 -.00 2.0% 11453511 511007 ASST TR /CO - 100,516.39 102,448.00 102,448.00 74,584.68 102,448.00 104,511.00 2.0% 11453511 511010 ADMIN ASST 28,057.72 40,951.00 40,951.00 28,827.01 40,951.00 40,951.00 .016 11453511 511011 ADMIN SECR 37,985.11 38,715.00 38,715.00 28,186.50 38,715.00 39,502.00 2.016 11453511 511012 CLERK 140,807.01 138,876.00 138,876.00 73,524.95 138,876.00 122,868.00 -11.5% 11453511 515000 OVERTIME 1,803.74 2,000.00 2,000.00 266.85 2,000.00 2,000.00 .0% 11453517 517017 SCK LV BBK ,' ' 410.20 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% TOTAL SALARIES 480,170.05 496,858.00 ,496,858.00 331,958.49 496,858.00 487,181.00 -1.916 05 EXPENSES 11455530 530105 PRINTING 15,427.64 17,000.00 17,000.00 4,442.05 17,000.00 17,000.00 .096 11455530 530110 TAX TITLE 10,610.83 14,000.00 14,000.00 2,315.00 14,000.00 14,000.00 .0% co W 03/30/2012 11:36 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 FINANCE ITONN FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL T0VVN Or READING, W'k OF READING NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM IPG 3 bgnyrpts PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 11455530 530111 BANK SVCS 11,312.24 12,000.00 12,000.00 8,040.23 12,000.00 12,000.00 .0% 11455531 531000 PRDEV TRN 1,355.89 750.00 750.00 2,174.15 750.00 1,500.00 100.0% 11455531 531010 PRDEV DUES 930.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 831.90 1,000.00 1,000.00 .0% 11455531 531091 PRDEV TRAV 1,895.36 750.00 750.00 890.30 750.00 1,000.00 33.3% 11455540 540000 SUPP /EQUIP 772.78 .00 .00 1,797.59 .00 .00 .0% 11455542 542000 OFFC SUPPL 6,456.44 7,000.00 7,000.00 3,742.50 7,000.00 8,000.00 14.3% 11455542 542127 POSTAGE 33,259.89 27,000.00 27,000.00 21,806.89 27,000.00 28,000.00 3.7% TOTAL EXPENSES 82,021.07 79,500.00 79,500.00 46,040.61 79,500.00 82,500.00 3.8% TOTAL FINANCE 562,191.12 576,358.00 576,358.00 377,999.10 576,358.00 569,681.00 -1.2% 0152 HUMAN RESOURCES 03 SALARIES 11523511 511003 HR ADMIN 75,793.76 77,251.00 77,251.00 56,244.79 77,251.00 78,809.00 2.0% TOTAL SALARIES 75,793.76 77,251.00 77,251.00 56,244.79 77,251.00 78,809.00 2.0% 05 EXPENSES 11525530 530100 ADVERTISNG 3,462.24 2,000.00 2,000.00 901.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 .0% 11525530 530140 MEDCL SVCS 7,380.00 - 6,000.00 6,000.00 4,091.50 6,000.00 6,000.00 .0 °s TOTAL EXPENSES 10,842.24 8,000.00 8,000.00 4,992.50 8,000.00 81000.00 .0% TOTAL HUMAN RESOURCES 86,636.00 85,251.00 85,251.00 61,237.29 85,251.00 86,809.00 1.8% 0155 TECHNOLOGY 03 SALARIES 11553511 511003 DS ADMIN 80,142.90 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 03/30/2012 11:36 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 FINANCE FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL TOWN OF REALiNG, MA (TOWN OF READING NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM IPG 4 bgnyrpts PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 11553511 511004 NETW ADMIN 78,575.55 83,267.00 83,267.00 60,648.00 83,267.00 84,995.00 2.1% 11553511 511148 TECHNICIAN 51,580.53 103,077.00 103,077.00 63,232.47 103,077.00 106,175.00 3.0$ 11553511 511149 GIS COORD 61,199.16 63,619. -00 63,619.00 46,312.55 63,619.00 64,891.00 2.0$ 11553511 515000 OVERTIME .00 3,100.00 3,100.00 195.00 3,100.00 2,500.00 -19.0 11553517 517017 - SICK LEAVE 7,670.63 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% TOTAL SALARIES 279,168.77 253,063.00 253,063.00 170,388.02 253,063.00 258,561.00 2.2$ 05 EXPENSES 11555521 521390 TELEPHONE 38,632.40 45,000.00 45,000.00 39,916.89 45,000.00 42,000.00 -6.7$ co 11555524 524000 MAINT /REPR , ? 8,825.50 7,000.00 7,000.00 6,223.07 7,000.00 7,000.00 .0% 11555530 530000 PROF SVCS 400.00 2,500.00 2,500.00 .00 2,500.00 2,500.00 .0$ 11555530 530121 INTERNET 493.19 1,500.00 1,500.00 .00 1,500.00 1,500.00 .0% ' 11555536 536000 LIC SFTWR 43,855.89 7,000.00 7,000.00 7,909.35 7,000.00 7,000.00 .0$ 11555536 536100 LIC ADMINS ' 1,800.00 1,800.00 1,800.00 1,800.00 1,800.00 1,900.00 5.6% 11555536 536110 LIC MUNIS 57,421.15 75,000.00 75,000.00 63,699.71 75,000.00 78,750.00 5.0% 11555536 536115 LIC PUBSAF - - .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 21,500.00 .0% 11555536 536120 LIC ASSESS .00 8,000.00 8,000.00 .00 8,000.00 7,500.00 -6.3% 11555536 536123 LIC GIS 8,373.62 15,000.00 15,000.00 8,377.96 15,000.00 12,750.00 -15.0% 11555536 536130 LIC MSFT - 2,511.32 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0$ 11555536 536132 LIC WEB 4,400.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 .00 5,000.00 7,000.00 40.0% 11555536 536135 LIC DOC ST 13,589.00 14,000.00 14,000.00 13,611.00 14,000.00 14,700.00 5.0$ 11555536 536137 LIC COMMUN 12,200.00 12,000.00 12,000.00 9,900.00 12,000.00 12,600.00 5.0$ co C+7 03/30/2012 11:36 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 FINANCE FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL TOWN OF READING, P,IA. TOWN OF READING NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION PG 5 Ibgnyrpte FOR PERIOD 99 2013 PCT 4- FINCOM CHANGE 11555536 536138 LIC PERMIT .00 22,000.00 22,000.00 .00 22,.000.00 22,100.00 .5% 11555536 536139 LIC CEMSYS - 1,260.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 .00 1,500.00 1,400.00 -6.7% 11555542 542000 OFFC SUPPL .00 .00 .00 440.76 .00 .00 .0% 11555542 542115 TONER CART 13,075.82 13,000.00 13,000.00. 10,000.00 13,000.00 13,000.00 .0% 11555555 555000 PRTS &SUPPL 14,261.92 - 12,000.00 12,000.00 12,622.96 12,000.00 15,000.00 25.0% 11555555 555100 PC HRDWR 23,786.44 25,000.00 25,000.00 10,622.26 25,000.00 25,000.00 .0% 11555555 555110 NET HRDWR 2,933.04 10,000.00 10,000.00 5,548.55 10,000.00 12,000.00 20.0% 11555555 555125 GIS SUPPL 3,895.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 6,750.00 2,000.00 1,000.00 -50.0% TOTAL EXPENSES 251,714.29 279,300.00 279,300.00 197,422.51 279,300.00 306,200.00 9.6% TOTAL TECHNOLOGY 530,883.06 532,363.00 532,363.00 367,810.53 532,363.00 564,761.00 6.1% 0161 TOWN CLERK 03 SALARIES 11613511 511003 TOWN CLERK 62,725.74 63,613.00 63,613.00 46,000.50 63,613.00 64,891.00 2.0% 11613511 511120 ASST IN CL 44,195.04 45,044.00 45,044.00 32,789.29 45,044.00 45,943.00 2.0% TOTAL SALARIES 106,920.78 108,657.00 108,657.00 78,789.79 108,657.00 110,834.00 2.0% 05 EXPENSES 11615530 530000 PROF SVCS 33.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 164.00 1,000.00 500.00 -50.0% TOTAL EXPENSES 33.00 1,000.00 _ 1,000.00 164.00 1,000.00 500.00 -50.0% TOTAL TOWN CLERK 106,953.78 109,657.00 109,657.00 78,953.79 109,657.00 111,334.00 1.51 0162 ELECTIONS & REGISTRATION 03 SALARIES 11623511 511150 REGISTRAR 1,530.18 1,800.00 1,800.00 1,131.87 .1,800.00 1,800.00 .0% 11625530 530100 '[OWN OF kEADING, N; [A 03/30/2012 11:36 5,176.72 TOWN OF READING 530105 blelacheur NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS PROJECTION: 20131 FY13 General Fund CENSUS FINANCE 4,126.50 5,553.84 co 11625530 530152 2011 2012 2012 6,104.76 ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 11623511 511153 ELEC WRK 1,800.00 11625540 540000 37,432.74 30,000.00 30,000.00 11623511 511155 TM MONITOR 549307 MEALS /FOOD ..00 1,500.00 1,500.00 11623511 596120 ST GR SUPP 26,929.83 TOTAL ELECTIONS - 10,592.00 - 1.0,344.00 - 10,344.00 TOTAL SALARIES TOTAL FINANCE 1,547,426.00 28,370.92 22,956.00 22,956.00 05 EXPENSES 1,547,426.00 1,552,862.11 11625530 530100 ADVERTISNG 2,052.30 5,176.72 11625530 530105 PRINTING 940.00 5,143.35 11625530 530151 CENSUS 4,126.50 5,553.84 co 11625530 530152 BALLOT PRG 0) 6,104.76 11625530 530153 PROF /TECH 1,800.00 1,800.00 11625540 540000 SUPP /EQUIP 3,343.61 781.51 11625549 549307 MEALS /FOOD 1,440.07 2,369.65 TOTAL EXPENSES 28,500.00 26,929.83 TOTAL ELECTIONS & REGISTRATI 51,456.00 55,300.75 TOTAL FINANCE 1,547,426.00 1,552,862.11 1,071,303.76 GRAND TOTAL 1,547,426.00 1,552,862.11 2012 ACTUAL 16,341.21 500.18 .00 17.973.26 3,500.00 3,500.00 2,052.30 4,000.00 4,000.00 940.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 4,126.50 10,000.00 10,000.00 .00 1,000.00 1,000.00 1,800.00 3,500.00 3,500.00 3,343.61 1,500.00 1,500.00 1,440.07 28,500.00 28,500.00 13,702.48 51,456.00 51,456.00 31,675.74 1,547,426.00 1,547,547.38 1,071,303.76 1,547,426.00 1,547,547.38 1,071,303.76 ** END OF REPORT - Generated by Bob LeLacheur ** 2012 PROJECTION 30,000.00 1,500.00 - 10,344.00 22,956.00 3,500.00 4,000.00 5,000.00 10,000.00 1,000.00 3,500.00 1,500.00 28,500.00 51,456.00 1,547,426.00 1.547.426.00 PG 6 bgnyrpte FOR PERIOD 99 2013 PCT 4- FINCOM CHANGE 45,000.00 50.0% 1,500.00 .0% - 6,284.00 - 19.9% 40,016.00 74.3$ 3,500.00 .0% 4,000.00 .0% 5,000.00 .0% 10,000.00 .016 1,000.00 .01; 3,000.00 -14.3% 2,500.00 66.7% 29,000.00 1.8% 69,016.00 34.1% 1,619,783.00 4.7% 1,619,783.00 4.7% 'r0 \A!N Or READING, N,!A, 03/30/2012 11:37 TOWN OF READING Ibgnyrpte PG 1 blelacheur (NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS PROJECTION: 20131 FY13 General Fund FOR PERIOD 99 FINANCE RESERVE FUND 2011 2012 2012 2012 2012 2013 PCT ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD ACTUAL PROJECTION 4- FINCOM CHANGE 0132 RESERVE FUND 05 EXPENSES 11325578 578900 FINCOM R F .00 150,000.00 116, 000. 00 .00 150,000.00 150,000.00 29.3% TOTAL EXPENSES .00 150,000.00 116,ODO.00 .00 150,000.00 150,000.00 29.316 TOTAL RESERVE FUND .00 150,000.00 116,000.00 .00 150,000.00 150,DO0.00 29.3% TOTAL FINANCE RESERVE FUND .00 150,000.00 116,000.00 .00 150,000.00 150,000.00 29.3% GRAND TOTAL .00 150,000.00 _ 116,000.00 .00 150,000.00 150,000.00 29.3% c0 ** END OF REPORT - Generated by Bob LeLacheur ** J 8 Community Services FY13 Budget Overview The Community Services Department is comprised of six divisions: Conservation; Planning; Inspections; Health; Elder /Human Services and Veterans Services. Wages represent 66% of department costs; Veteran's benefits payments are 22% (75% of these are reimbursed to the general fund by the state in the following year); and the remaining 12% are other expenses. In FY13 the department budget has a 1.1% increase, which follows a 9.0% decrease in FY12. Staffing (15.0 FTEs; unchanged) Wage costs ($729,282; -3.2 %) In FY13 there are no proposed changes to staffing levels, after several changes the prior year. All employees are budgeted for a 2% increase in the department. FY12 FY13 Change CS Administration $254,103 $263,439 +3.7% Conservation $31,605 $29,543 -6.5% Planning $51,580 $56,948 +10.4% Inspections $132,431 $133,301 +0.7% Health $212,617 $222,004 +4.4% Elder Services $169,041 $165,989 -1.8% Veterans $270,102 $272,108 +0.7% Historical $1,000. $1,000 0.0% TOTAL $1,122,479 $1,144 332 +1.9% Staffing (15.0 FTEs; unchanged) Wage costs ($729,282; -3.2 %) In FY13 there are no proposed changes to staffing levels, after several changes the prior year. All employees are budgeted for a 2% increase in the department. In the Administration budget an increase is projected in Overtime because of the need for meeting minutes. Compensatory time off was often exchanged for staff responsible for meeting minutes in the past. However because the department is very busy, it is preferable to pay Overtime and have staff available to work as many hours as possible. The Administrative Assistant position continues to be shared with the Town Administration department. In Conservation a retirement last year was replaced by an employee at a lower step, and there is a small increase from 20 to 23 hours /week in this position. In Planning, turnover caused the need to hire at a higher step. In Inspections, November 2011 Town Meeting increased the hours of the Alternate Building Inspector which is maintained in this budget. Retirements in two positions were replaced by employees at lower steps. FY12 FY13 Change FTE CS Administration $238,803 $246,039 +3.0% 4.7 Conservation $31,605 $29,543 -6.5% 0.5 Planning $51,580 $56,948 +10.4% 0.5 Inspections $132,431 $133,301 +0.7% 2.0 Health $115,567 $86,854 -24.8% 2.5 Elder Services $163,892 $154,989 -5.4% 3.8 Veterans $19,602 $21,608 +10.2% 0.5 Historical $0 $0 TOTAL 1 $753,480 $729,282 -3.2% 15.0 In the Administration budget an increase is projected in Overtime because of the need for meeting minutes. Compensatory time off was often exchanged for staff responsible for meeting minutes in the past. However because the department is very busy, it is preferable to pay Overtime and have staff available to work as many hours as possible. The Administrative Assistant position continues to be shared with the Town Administration department. In Conservation a retirement last year was replaced by an employee at a lower step, and there is a small increase from 20 to 23 hours /week in this position. In Planning, turnover caused the need to hire at a higher step. In Inspections, November 2011 Town Meeting increased the hours of the Alternate Building Inspector which is maintained in this budget. Retirements in two positions were replaced by employees at lower steps. In Health, a regional arrangement with Melrose and Wakefield caused the wages for the Administrator to _shift into expenses. Thus in FY12 a $10,000 wage plus a $27,500 expense is comparable to the full $38,000 expense shown in FY13. In addition, there is a $23,000 transfer from wages to expenses to allow Melrose to hire a 17- hour /week health inspector as part of the regionalization. These hours were caused by Reading staff turnover. In Elder/Human Services turnover was replaced by hiring at a lower step. The hours for the Nurse Advocate were reduced slightly in conjunction with a schedule change implemented during FYI 2. The full state grant offset is moved into wages only for FY13, a pattern consistent with all other town departments to where the grant does not specify otherwise. The Veteran's �O Service Officer wages are increased to allow more hours in this busy function, although the position is still shown as 0.5 FTE in conjunction with the regional district with Wilmington. Expenses ($415,050; +12.5 %) At the November 2011 Town Meeting, funding for Veteran's benefits was increased by $100,000 to $250,000, and this is maintained in the FY13 budget. Increases in remaining expenses are driven by the change in the way the Health staff positions are now shared with Melrose and Wakefield, and paid to Melrose as an expense instead of by Reading as a wage. In addition, grant offsets have been moved from expense line items to offset wages as described above. There are no other significant changes to expenses in this department. 03/30/2012 11:39 TOWN OF READING PG 1 blelacheur INEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Ibgnyrpte PROJECTION: 20131 FY13 General Fund FOR PERIOD 99 - COMMUNITY SERVICES 2011 2012 2012 2012 2012 2013 PCT ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD ACTUAL PROJECTION 4- FINCOM CHANGE 0126 COMMUNITY SVC ADMINISTRATION 03 SALARIES 11263511 511001 TOWN PLANR 99,403.45 100,889.00 100,889.00 73,387.50 100,889.00 102,906.00 2.0% 11263511 511010 ADMIN ASST 40,982.28 28,414.00 28,414.00 20,668.87 28,414.00 28,985.00 2.0% 11263511 511012 CLERK 67,702.45 105,000.00 105,000.00 73,957.66 105,000.00 105,648.00 .6% 11263511 515000 OVERTIME ' 4,546.14 4,500.00 4,500.00 2,632.75 4,500.00 8,500.00 88.9% TOTAL SALARIES 212,634.32 238,803.00 238,803.00 170,646.78 238,803.00 246,039.00 3.0% 05 EXPENSES CD 11265521 521309 WTR /SWR /SW 66.04 100.00 100.00 33.02 100.00 100.00 .O% 11265521 521392 WIRELESS 518.41 400.00 400.00 326.33 400.00 500.00 25.0% 11265530 530000 HOUSINGPLN .00 .00 4,000.00 .00 .00 .00 - 100.0% 11265530 530100 ADVERTISNG 648.74 500.00 500.00 364.19 500.00 1,500.00 200.0% 11265531 531000 PRDEV TRN 442.25 4,000.00 4,000.00 7.88 4,000.00 5,000.00 25.0% 11265531 531901 PRDEV HLTH 423.00 .00 .00 714.00. 00 .00 .0% 11265531 531902 PRDEV E/H .00 .00 .00 281.00 .00 .00 .0% 11265531 531903 PRDEV INSP 817.95 .00 .00 555.00 .00 .00 - ..0% 11265531 531904 PRDEV VET 35.00 .00 .00 155.00 .00 .00 .0% 11265531 531905 PRDEV CONS 628.00 .00 .00 645.00 .00 .00 .0% 11265531 531906 PRDEV PLAN 1,170.00 .00 .00 1,015.00 .00 .00 .0% 11265542 542000 OFFC SUPPL ' 2,267.07 6,500.00 6,500.00 2,517.17 6,500.00 6,500.00 .0% 11265542 542901 OFCSP HLTH 564.73 .00 .00 265.40 .00 .00 .0% 03/30/2012 11:39 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 COMMUNITY SERVICES FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL W 0 R E ADiN,G, M A: TOWN OF READING (NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM PG 2 Ibgnyrpte PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 11265542 542902 OFCSP E/H 1,112.24 .00 .00 .637.82 :00 .00 .0% 11265542 542903 OFCSP INSP 722.53 .00 .00 605.78 .00 .00 .0% 11265542 542904 OFCSP VET 20.96 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 11265542 542905 OFCSP CONS _ 17.84 .00 .00 52.99 .00 .00 .0% 11265542 542906 OFCSP PLAN 698.74 .00 .00 360.34 .00 .00 .0% 11265542 542907 OFCSP TMGR 183.97 .00 .00 312.60 .00 .00 .0% 11265571 571000 MILEAGE 3,502.06 3,800.00 3,800.00 2,319.66 3,800.00 3,800.00 .0% TOTAL EXPENSES 13,839.53 15,300.00 19,300.00 ll,168.1B 15,300.00 17,400.00 -9.8% TOTAL COMMUNITY SVC ADMINIST 226,473.85 254,103.00 258,103.00 181,814.96 254,103.00 263,439.00 2.116 CD 0171 CONSERVATION DIVISION , 03 SALARIES 11713511 511003 CONS ADMIN 59,259.80 31,605.00 31,605.00 17,653.73 31,605.00 31,543.00 -.2% 11713511 596130 RVFND SUPP ' - 6,000.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 - 2,000.00 .0% 11713517 517017 SICK LEAVE 3,297.25 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% TOTAL SALARIES 56,557.05 31,605.00 31,605.00 17,653.73 31,605.00 29,543.00 -6.5% TOTAL CONSERVATION DIVISION 56,557.05 31,605.00 31,605.00 17,653.73 31,605.00 29,543.00 -6.5% 0175 PLANNING 03 SALARIES 11753511 511045 STAFF PLNR 51,375.00 51,580.00 51,580.00 37,190.26 51,580.00 56,948.00 10.4% 11753511 515000 OVERTIME .00 .00 .00 1,047.77 .00 .00 .0% 03/30/2012 11:39 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 COMMUNITY SERVICES - FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL TOWN Or READING, MA, TOWN OF READING INEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM PG 3 bgnyrpts PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 11753517 517017 SICK LEAVE .00 .00 .00 1,054.52 .00 .00 .0% TOTAL SALARIES 51,375.00 _ 51,580.00 51,580.00 39,292.55 51,580.00 56,948.00 10.4 % TOTAL PLANNING ' - 51,375.00 51,580.00 51,580.00 39,292.55 51,580.00 56,948.00 10.4% 0240 INSPECTIONS DIVISION - 03 SALARIES 12403511 511070 PRMT COORD 48,015.17 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 12403511 511216 BLDG INSP 74,050.20 _ 75,519.00 75,519.00 54,933.81 75,519.00 77,028.00 2.0% 12403511 511217 WIRE INSP 23,713.30 21,706.00 21,706.00 11,916.80 21,706.00 21,134.00 -2.6% CD 12403511 511218 PLUMB INSP 23,810.55 21,706.00 21,706.00 13,521.92 21,706.00 21,134.00 -2.6% N 12403511 511219 ALT INSP 2,154.92 6,500.00 .13,500.00 7,836.27 6,500.00 14,005.00 3.7% 12403517 517017 SICK LEAVE • 14,341.94 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .016 TOTAL SALARIES - 186,086.08 125,431.00 132,431.00 88,208.80 125,431.00 - 133,301.00 .71; TOTAL INSPECTIONS DIVISION 186,086.08 125,431.00 132,431.00 88,208.80 125,431.00 133,301.00 .7% 0511 HEALTH 03 SALARIES 15113511 511003 HEALTH ADM 62,995.33 38,094.00 10,594.00 10,402.88 38,094.00 .00 - 100.0% 15113511 511561 PH NURSE 46,477.71 46,366.00 46,366.00 34,452.00 46,366.00 48,223.00 4.0% 15113511 511564 HLTH INSP 58,811.91 60,707.00 60,707.00 40,775.73 60,707.00 40,731.00 -32.9% 15113511 515000 OVERTIME 40.94 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 15113511 596130 RVFND SUPP - 2,100.00 - 2,100.00 - 2,100.00 .00 - 2_,100.00 - 2,100.00 .016 03/30/2012 11:39 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 COMMUNITY SERVICES (TOWN FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL TOWN OF READING, M OF READING NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM PG 4 bgnyrpte PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE TOTAL SALARIES 166,225.89 143,067.00 115,567.00 85,630.61 143,067.00 86,854.00 -24:8% 05 - EXPENSES 15115530 530000 PROF SVCS 300.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 .0% 15115530 530512 ADMIN SVCS .00 .00 , 27,500.00 18,375.00 .00 68,000.00 147.3% 15115530 530520 WGHTS /MEAS 4,500.00 5,750.00 5,750.00 4,500.00 5,750.00 5,750.00 .0% 15115530 530530 ANIM DSPSL 5,625.76 6,850.00 6,850.00 4,678.80 6,850.00 6,500.00 -5. 1% 15115530 530550 MOSQ LRV C 3,100.00 - 5,000.00 5,000.00 .00 5,000.00 5,000.00 .016 15115530 530551 MOSQTO CTL 26,000.00 26,000.00 26,000.00 26,000.00 26,000.00 26,000.00 .0% 0 15115540 540521 INSP SUPP 1,020.46 2,250.00 2,250.00 26.23 2,250.00 2,000.00 -11.1% co 15115540 540524 CLINIC SUP 520.05 1,800.00 1,800.00 138.85 1,800.00 .00 - 100.0% 15115571 571000 MILEAGE 1,779.85 1,600.00 1,600.00 708.67 1,600.00 1,600.00 .0% 15115577 577500 RIVERSIDE 7,000.00 7,000.00 7,000.00 4,666.67 7,000.00 7,000.00 .0% 15115577 577510 EMARC 13,000.00 13,000.00 13,000.00 9,750.00 13,000.00 13,000.00 .0% TOTAL EXPENSES - 62,846.12 69,550.00 97,050.00 69,144.22 69,550.00 135,150.00 39.3% TOTAL HEALTH. 229,072.01 212,617 .00 212,617.00 154,774.83 212,617.00 222,004.00 4.496 0541 ELDER SERVICES 03 SALARIES 15413511 511003 ELD ADMIN 54,066.48 34,635.00 34,635.00 21,909.88 34,635.00 31,371.00 -9.4% 15413511 511523 VAN DRIVER 23,818.20 - 31,111.00 31,111.00 21,698.34. 31,111.00 30,491.00 -2.04; 15413511 511524 SUB VN DRV - 8,089.86 3,000.00 3,000.00 2,718.,03 3,000.00 3,000.00 .0% 03/3D/2012 11:39 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 COMMUNITY SERVICES FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL I0V`VN OF RE A,DING, N1 (TOWN OF READING NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIO BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM IPG 5 bgnyrpte PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 15413511 511525 SOCIAL WRK 51,776.48 52,815.00 52,815.00 38,418.00 52,815.00 53,873.00 2..0% 15413511 511527 SR CNT CRD 38,240.98 38,263.00 38,263.00 27,826.47 38,263.00 38,991.00 1.9% 15413511 511561 NURSE ADV 30,541.59 31,268.00 31,268.00 19,113.20 31,268.00 30,263.00 -3.2% 15413511 515000 OVERTIME .00 .00 .00 125.52 .00 .00 .0% 15413511 517017 SCK LV BBK 5,706.18 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 15413511 596120 ST GR SUPP - 24,200.00 - 24,200.00 - 24,200.00 - 24,200.00 - 24,200.00 - 30,000.00 24.0% 15413511 596180 TRFND SUPP ' .00 - 3,000.00 - 3,000.00 .00 - 3,000.00 - 3,000.00 .0% TOTAL SALARIES 188,039.77 163,892.00 163,892.00 107,609.44 163,892.00 154,989.00 -5.4% O OS EXPENSES ? 15415531 531010 PRDEV DUES 626.02 750.00 750.00 626.02 750.00 750.00 .0% 15415531 531090 PRDEV REG 796.16 200.00 200.00 70.00 200.00 200.00 .0% 15415531 531091 PRDEV TRAV 26.70 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 15415535 535304 PROGRAMS 1,009.90 1,125.00 1,125.00 .00 1,125.00 1,125.00 .0% 15415536 536000 LIC SFTWR . 893.00 900.00 900.00 897.12 900.00 900.00 .0% 15415540 540000 SUPP /EQUIP 438.05 1,325.00 1,325.00 84.75 1,325.00 1,325.00 .0% 15415540 540049 FURNISHING ' 1,096.77 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 15415551 551000 VOLNTTRAIN .122.05 100.00 100.00 .00 100.00 100.00 .0% 15415571 571000 MILEAGE 964.44 1,000.00 1,000.00 620.77 1,000.00 - 1,000.00 .0% 15415577 577540 MEAL DELIV 5,593.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,593.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 .0% 15415578 578018 VOLUNTCOST 595.61 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 15415578 596120 ST GR SUPP - 5,851.00 - 5,851.00 - 5,851.00 - 6,763.00 - 5,851.00 .00 - 100.0% TOTAL EXPENSES 577000 T0VVN OF RFAID!ING. N1 03/30/2012 11:39 TOWN OF READING blelacheur 194,350.47 NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS PROJECTION: 20131 FY13 General Fund 03 SALARIES COMMUNITY SERVICES 87,208.07 15433511 511003 VET SV OFF 21,608.00 2011 2012 2012 2012 577501 ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD ACTUAL TOTAL EXPENSES 577000 19,602.00 6,310.70 TOTAL ELDER SERVICES 21,608.00 194,350.47 10..2% 0543 VETERANS 19,602.00 03 SALARIES 14,184.45 87,208.07 15433511 511003 VET SV OFF 21,608.00 14,738.14 10.23 TOTAL SALARIES 577501 500.00 14,738.14 .00 05 EXPENSES 500.00 CD 15435571 571000 MILEAGE 500.00 Lq .00 .00 TOTAL EXPENSES 11,797.98 500.00 .00 500.00 .00 TOTAL VETERANS 20,102.00 577502 20,102.00 14,738.14 14,184.45 0544 VETERANS' AID 05 EXPENSES 5,149.00 5,149.00 1,128.66 169,041.00 169,041.00 - 108,738.10 2012 PROJECTION 5,149.00 169,041.00 IPG 6 bgnyrpts FOR PERIOD 99 2013 PCT 4- FINCOM CHANGE 11,000.00 113.64 165,989.00 -1.84 19,602.00 577000 19,602.00 14,184.45 19,602.00 21,608.00 10..2% 19,602.00 19,602.00 135,000.00 14,184.45 87,208.07 19,602.00 135,000.00 21,608.00 10.23 500.00 577501 500.00 .00 500.00 500.00 .0% 500.00 500.00 .00 .00 11,797.98 500.00 .00 500.00 .0% 20,102.00 577502 20,102.00 14,184.45 20,102.00 22,108.00 10.0% 15445577 577000 VETS BENEF ' 136,098.11 135,000.00 235,000.00 87,208.07 135,000.00 150,000.00 -36.2$ 15445577 577501 FUEL .00 .00 .00 11,797.98 .00 15,000.00 .0% 15445577 577502 DOCTOR .00 .00 .00 6,602.23 .00 4,000.00 .0% 15445577 577503 HOSPITAL .00 .00 .00 1,578.60 .00 4,000.00 .0% 15445577 577504 MEDICARE B ' .00 .00 .00 17,428.13 .00 25,000.00 .0% 15445577 577505 MEDIGAP .00 .00 .00 18,954.44 .00 25,000.00 .0% 15445577 577506 MED BENEFI 30,330.77 15,000.00 15,000.00 17,207.15 15,000.00 20,000.00 33.3% 05 EXPENSES 16915540 540000 SUPP /EQUIP 999.39 TOTAL EXPENSES 999.39 TOTAL HISTORICAL COMMISSION 999.39 TOTAL COMMUNITY SERVICES 1,126,740.25 GRAND TOTAL 1,126,740.25 PG . 7 bgnyrpta 1,000.00 TO1�f AF ADiNG, !'.'iA 03/30/2012 11:39 2012 TOWN OF READING 1,144,332.00 blelacheur 1.6% (NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS PROJECTION: 20131 FY13 General Fund 4- FINCOM COMMUNITY SERVICES CHANGE 2,329.45 1,000.00 .00 2011 2012 2012 775,161:79 ACTUAL .00 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 15445577 577507 DURABLEMED 775,161.79 .00 .00 .00 .00 15445577 577508 ONE TIME B 2,500.00 .096 659.38 .00 .00 15445577 577509 SHELTER .0t 1,391.14 .00 1,000.00 .00 .00 15445577 577511 DENTAL .00 .00 .00 170,373.19 .00 .00 15445577 577512 - AMBULANCE .0t 170,373.19 .00 150,000.00 .00 .00 15445577 577513 GLASSES .00 .00 .00 15445577 577514 MEDICARE D .00 .00 .00 TOTAL EXPENSES 167,088.26 150,000.00 250,000.00 TOTAL VETERANS' AID O 167,088.26 150,000.00 250,000.00 Cn 0691 HISTORICAL COMMISSION 05 EXPENSES 16915540 540000 SUPP /EQUIP 999.39 TOTAL EXPENSES 999.39 TOTAL HISTORICAL COMMISSION 999.39 TOTAL COMMUNITY SERVICES 1,126,740.25 GRAND TOTAL 1,126,740.25 PG . 7 bgnyrpta 1,000.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 FOR PERIOD 99 2012 2012 1,144,332.00 2013 1.6% PCT ACTUAL 1,000.00 PROJECTION 1,000.00 4- FINCOM 1,000.00 CHANGE 2,329.45 1,000.00 .00 2,000.00 .0% 64.00 775,161:79 .00 500.00 1,015,479.00 .02 193.00 775,161.79 .00 500.00 .096 4,906.00 REPORT - Generated .00 2,500.00 .096 100.00 .00 500.00 .0t 1,391.14 .00 1,000.00 .0% 613.00 .00 .00 .Ot 170,373.19 150,000.00 250,000.00 .0t 170,373.19 150,000.00 250,000.00 .0% 1,000.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 121.18 .04; 1,000.00 1,000.00 1,144,332.00 11000.00 1.6% 121.18 1,000.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 121.18 1,000.00 1,015,479.00 1,126,479.00 775,161:79 1,015,479.00 1,015,479.00 1,126,479.00 775,161.79 1,015,479.00 ** END OF REPORT - Generated by Bob LeLacheur ** 1,000.00 .Ot 1,000.00 .04; 1,000.00 .Ot 1,144,332.00 1.6% 1,144,332.00 1.6% M J Library FY13 Budget Overview The Reading Public Library general fund budget for FY13 is $1,290,579 which is a 4.0% increase compared to FY12. In addition, the Library has access to funds from grants and donations. No change in hours of service to the public is expected. The Town continues to have a grant application pending approval from the state for nearly $12 million in building improvements. The Library is divided into these divisions: Administration Staff (3.0 FTEs): Director; Assistant Director; Administrative Assistant; Circulation Staff (5.75 FTEs): Division Head; Library technicians 3.5 FTE (Eleven part- time); Pages 1.25 FTE (Five part- time); Children's Division Staff (4.47 FTEs): Division Head, Children's Librarians 1.77 FTE (Three part -time Librarians); Library Associate .6 FTE; Pages -1.1 FTE (Five part- time); Reference Division Staff (4.5 FTEs): Division Head; Staff Librarians 3.0 FTE (Five part -time Librarians); Young Adult Librarians .5 FTE (Two part -time Librarians); Technical Services Staff (2.4 FTEs): Division Head; Library Associates 1.0 FTE (Two part- time); Pages .4 FTE (One part - time). Staffing (20.1 FTEs; no change) Wages ($1,007,579; +2.0 %) All employees are budgeted for a 2% increase. Funding for Sundays is tracked newly within appropriate division accounts so "Sundays" don't appear as a separate line item. Note that there is NO overtime budget for the library. Sick time, earned time off, and extended leaves have never been budgeted. The library has recently introduced a new way to track wage costs by division - this method will provide more detailed insight into the different functions at the library. Wages FY12 FY13 Change Administration $193,905 $197,551 +1.9% Circulation $207,017 $211,388 +2.1% Children's $221,975 $226,026 +1.8% Reference $258,167 $263,593 +2.1% Tech Services $106,653 $109,021 +2.2% Total $9872717 $1,007,579 +2.0% Expenses ($283,000; +11.5 %) The expense budget was built with three components — first, a general 2% increase was applied; second, the cost of the NOBLE inter - library software license ($55,000) was funded to the full 16% increase as a new version is implemented for FY13; and third the materials budget was funded at the 15% state requirement. This FY13 budget complies with the Municipal Appropriation Requirement formula, allowing the Library to be fully certifiable by the Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners. 03/30/2012 11:40 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 LIBRARY FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL r%at V N OF READING, Ivi TOWN OF READING (NEXT YEAR / CURRENT'YEAR BUDGET ANALYSI3 Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM PG 1 bgnyrpte PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 0610 LIBRARY ADMINISTRATION 03 SALARIES 16103511 511010 ADMIN ASST 26,630.03 40,370.00 40,370.00 29,478.21 40,370.00 40,951.00 1.4$ 16103511 511641 DIRECTOR 83,229.76 84,678.00 84,678.00 61,955.68 64,678.00 86,365.00 2.0% 16103511 511642 ASST DIREC 67,514.30 68,857.00 68,857.00 50,395.37 68,857.00 70,235.00 2.0% 16103511 511643 ADMIN SECR 5,978.50 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 16103511 511646 SR ASSOC 95.01 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 16103511 511649 - CIRC TECH .01 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 16103511 511651 PAGE % 0 65.65 .00 .00 490.31 .00 .00 .0 On 16103511 515000 OVERTIME %, 2,293.77 .00 .00 - 116.08 .00 .00 .0 16103517 517017 SCK LV BBK - 5,145.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .016 TOTAL SALARIES 190,952.03 193,905.00 193,905.00 142,435.65 193,905.00 197,551.00 1.9% 05 EXPENSES 16105524 524000 MAINT /REPR 4,190.95 3,500.00 3,500.00 4,419.66 3,500.00 4,300.00 22.9% 16105531.531090 PRDEV REG 4,497.70 3,500.00 3,500.00 3,000.18 3,500.00 3,500.00 .0% 16105531 531091 PRDEV TRAV 1,287.36 2,135.00 2,135.00 2,301.68 2,135.00 2,200.00 3.0% 16105536 536000 LIC SFTWR 47,158.02 47,278.00 47,278.00 31,438.68 47,278.00 55,000.00 16.3% 16105540'540000 SUPP /EQUIP - - 6,864.88 7,700.00 7,700.00 3,942.79 7,700.00 7,700.00 .0% 16105542 542000 - OFFC SUPPL 13,125.15 9,200.00 9,200.00 - 7,261.45 9,200.00 9,200.00 .0% 16105555 555000 TECH SUPP 878.82 7,500.00 7,500.00 2,778.91 7,500.00 7,500.00 .0% 16105556 556000 MATERIALS 193,600.00 16.70 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% r O (D TO `,NN OF READING, MA 03/30/2012 11:40 TOWN OF READING PG 2 blelacheur (NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSI3 bgnyrpts PROJECTION: 20131 FY13 General Fund FOR PERIOD 99 LIBRARY 2011 2012 2012 2012 2012 2013 PCT ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD ACTUAL PROJECTION 4- FINCOM CHANGE 16105556 556610 ADLT BOOKS 79,581.85 72,000.00 68,462.00 49,102.91 72,000.00 .00 - 100.0% 16105556 556611 CHLD BOOKS 28,293.31 26,000.00 24,650.00 19,440.96 26,000.00 .00 - 100.0% 16105556 556612 TEEN BOOKS .00 9,000.00 5,000.00 3,534.71 9,000.00 .00 - 100.0% 16105556 556620 ADLT AUDIO 14,811.74 14,000.00 12,200.00 10,949.77 14,000.00 .00 - 100.0% 16105556 556621 CHLD AUDIO 3,407.08 5,500.00 4,250.00 3,046.36 5,500.00 .00 - 100.0% 16105556 556622 TEENAUDIO .00 .00 1,000.00 203.63 .00 .00 - 100.0% 16105556 556630 ADLT VIDEO 23,490.77 20,000.00 14,000.00 12,083.99 20,000.00 .00 - 100.01 16105556 556631 CHLD VIDEO 6,666.60 7,000.00 6,666.00 3,470.23 7,000.00 .00 - 100.0% 16105556 556640 PERIODICAL 13,989.50 9,000.00 13,989.00 1,499.88 9,000.00 .00 - 100.0% 16105556 556650 ELECTRONIC 329.76 .00 12,679.00 1,357.00 .00 .00 - 100.0%- 16105556 556660 ONLINE DB 11,847.00 10,500.00 4,507.00 5,128.00 10,500.00 .00 - 100.0% 16105556 556670 0TH MATERL .00 .00 1,000.00 211.50 .00 .00 - 100.0% 16105556 556680 EBKSADLT .00 .00 3,197.00 1,099.57 .00 .00 - 100.0% 16105556 556681 EBKSCHLD .00 .00 800.00 800.00 .00 .00 - 100.0% 16105556 556682 EBKSTEEN .00 .00 600.00 383.38 .00 .00 - 100.0% TOTAL EXPENSES 260,437.19 253,813.00 253,813.00 167,455.24 253,813.00 283,000.00 11.51 TOTAL LIBRARY ADMINISTRATION 451,389.22 447,718.00 447,718.00 309,890.89 447,718.00 480,551.00 7.3% 0612 LIBRARY CIRCULATION 03 SALARIES 16123511 511644 CIRC DIVHD 53,420.31 54,280.00 54,280.00 39,880.80 54,280.00 55,593.00 2.4% 16123511 511646 SR. LIBRAR 29,506.94 29,124.00 29,124.00 19,737.21 29,124.00 29,707.00 2.0% 16123511 511649 10 VV N OF R, EHC3i G, vlA, 03/30/2012 11:40 93,517.47 OF READING 511651 blelacheur (TOWN NEXT YEAR./ CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS PROJECTION: 2D131 FY13 General Fund OVERTIME LIBRARY 13,671.46 6,823.97 16123511 515610 2011 ,. 2012 2012 2012 2012 " ACTUAL OHIO BUD REVISED BUD ACTUAL PROJECTION 16123511 511649 TECHNICIAN 72,648.62 93,517.47 16123511 511651 PAGE 2.0% 20,104.29 16123511 515000 OVERTIME 13,671.46 6,823.97 16123511 515610 SUNDAY HRS 2.0$ .00 TOTAL SALARIES 25,197.00 .00 1,049.92 203,372.98 TOTAL LIBRARY CIRCULATION .00 2.0% 203,372.98 0614 LIBRARY CHILDRENS DIVISION 03 SALARIES 3,108.09 J � 16143511 511649 CHLD DIVHD CD 60,388.73 16143511 511645 CHILD LIBR 207,017.00 107,838.67 16143511 511646 SRLIBASSOC 211,388.00 24,551.66 16143511 511649 TECHNICIAN 207,017.00 .00 208.95 16143511 511651 PAGE 211,388.00 .00 13,757.59 16143511 515000 OVERTIME 10,102.00 8,203.83 16143511 515610 SUNDAY HRS 10,300.00 .00 TOTAL SALARIES 221,975.00 214,949.43 TOTAL LIBRARY CHILDRENS DIVI 226,026.00 214,949.43 0616 LIBRARY REFERENCE DIVISION 03 SALARIES PG 3 bgnyrpte FOR PERIOD 99 2013 PCT 4- FINCOM CHANGE 96,552.00 96,552.00 72,648.62 96,552.00 98,483.00 2.0% 20,078.00 20,078.00 13,671.46 20,078.00 20,480.00 2.0$ .00 25,197.00 .00 1,049.92 25,197.00 .00 25,700.00 .00 2.0% .0$ 6,983.00 6,983.00. 3,108.09 6,983.00 7,125.00 2.0% 207,017.00 207,017.00 150,096.10 207,017.00 211,388.00 2.1% 207,017.00 207,017.00 .00 150,096.10 207,017.00 .00 211,388.00 .00 2.1% .0% 61,753.00 61,753.00 45,410.59 61,753.00 62,601.00 1.4% 108,871.00 108,871.00 83,370.75 108,871.00. 111,050.00 2.0% 25,197.00 25,197.00 17,246.14 25,197.00 25,700.00 2.0% 1,615.00 1,615.00 652.57 1,615.00 1,650.00 2.2% 14,437.00 14,437.00 10,311.22 14,437.00 14,725.00 2.04 .00 .00 1,106.20 .00 .00 .0% 10,102.00 10,102.00 2,214.96 10,102.00 10,300.00 2.0% 221,975.00 221,975.00 160,314.43 221,975.00 226,026.00 1.8% 221,975.00 221,975.00 160,314.43 221,975.00 226,026.00 1.8% 16163511 511644 REF DIVHD 58,979.55 59,928.00 59,928.00 44,035.05 59,928.00 61,368.00 2 .4% 03/30/2012 11:40 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 LIBRARY FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL TOWN OF READING, MA, TOWN OF READING (NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM PG 4 Ibgnyrpts PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 16163511 511645 LIBRARIANS 184,901.95 188,021.00 188,021.00 139,997.68 188,021.00 191,800.00 2.0% 16163511 515000 OVERTIME 4,903.36 .00 .00 795.55 .00 .00 .0% 16163511 515610 SUNDAY HRS .00 10,218.00 10,218.00 2,283.27 10,216.00 10,425.00 2.0% TOTAL SALARIES 298,784.86 258,167.00 258,167.00 187,111.55 258,167.00 263,593.00 2.1$ TOTAL LIBRARY REFERENCE DIVI 248,784.86 256,167.00 258,167.00 187,111.55 258,167.00 263,593.00 2.1% 0618 LIBRARY TECH SERVICES DIVISION 03 SALARIES 16183511 511644 TECH DIVHD 60,527.06 61,142.00 61,142.00 45,061.11 61,142.00 62,601.00 2.4%' 16183511 511646 SR. LIBRAR 25,881.40 26,198.00 26,198.00 19,205.87 26,198.00 26,725.00 2.0% 16183511 511648 SR LIBTECH 10,457.93 11,005.00 11,005.00 7,827.07 11,005.00 11,225.00 2.0% 16183511 511651 PAGE 6,865.50 7,390.00 7,390.00 4,614.07 7,390.00 7,535.00 2.0% 16183511 515000 OVERTIME 1,214.72 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .06 16183511 515610 SUNDAY HRS .00 918.00 918.00 - .00 918.00 935.00 1.9% TOTAL SALARIES 104,946.61 106,653.00 106,653.00 76,708.12 106,653.00 109,021.00 2.2% TOTAL LIBRARY TECH SERVICES 104,946.61 106,653.00 106,653.00 76,708.12 106,653.00 109,021.00 2.2% TOTAL LIBRARY 1,223,443.10 1,241,530.00 1,241,530.00 884,121.09 1,241,530.00 1,290,579.00 4.0% GRAND TOTAL 1,223,443.10 1,241,530.00 1,241,530.00 B84,121.09 1,241,530.00 1,290,579.00 4.0% ** END OF REPORT - Generated by Bob LeLacheur ** J N Public Works FY13 Budget Overview The Department of Public works consists of several divisions including engineering, highway and equipment maintenance, general administration, storm water (not the enterprise fund), cemetery, recreation, and parks and forestry. Town Meeting also votes individual budgets for the categories of snow and ice, street lights, and rubbish collection and disposal, as well as the three Enterprise Funds. Total Division budgets show an increase of only 0.9% as no significant changes are projected in the FYI budget. The Snow and Ice budget is increased 6.2% to $600,000 as part of a strategy to bring it closer to the ten -year average of $688,000. Rubbish is increased only 1.9% in line with the success of the recent program changes. Street lighting is further reduced by 1.8% after being lowered by 20% at November 2011 Town Meeting due to new electric rates for street lights. Staffing (42.0 FTEs; unch. excluding seasonal workers) Wage costs — Divisions ($2,348,947; +2.6 %) All wage costs assume a 2% increase for employees. One long- term seasonal worker in the parks & forestry division is restored in this budget. This became more important when the Town did not go forward with the carry-in carry-out policy proposed last year. Differences from +2% in wage budgets are otherwise caused by turnover or promotions, as there are no other changes in positions or hours. No significant changes are made to Overtime. In FY12 because of a series of fall storms these OT accounts will be over budget. Out of grade pay line items are increased because of recent trends. Wa es FY12 FY13 Change Engineering $415,588 $433,809 +4.4% H &E ui . $1,463,981 $1,435,437 -1.9% Administration $257,441 $263,079 +2.2% Storm Water $149,463 $156,330 +4.6% Cemetery $184,761 $181,858 -1.6% Recreation $149,133 $151,509 +1.6% Pks & Forest $506,273 $532,325 +5.1% Divisions $3126,640 $3,154,347 +0.9% Snow /Lts /Trash $2,290,734 $2,300,0K +45.5% Department $5,417,374 $5,454,347 +0.7% Total Division budgets show an increase of only 0.9% as no significant changes are projected in the FYI budget. The Snow and Ice budget is increased 6.2% to $600,000 as part of a strategy to bring it closer to the ten -year average of $688,000. Rubbish is increased only 1.9% in line with the success of the recent program changes. Street lighting is further reduced by 1.8% after being lowered by 20% at November 2011 Town Meeting due to new electric rates for street lights. Staffing (42.0 FTEs; unch. excluding seasonal workers) Wage costs — Divisions ($2,348,947; +2.6 %) All wage costs assume a 2% increase for employees. One long- term seasonal worker in the parks & forestry division is restored in this budget. This became more important when the Town did not go forward with the carry-in carry-out policy proposed last year. Differences from +2% in wage budgets are otherwise caused by turnover or promotions, as there are no other changes in positions or hours. No significant changes are made to Overtime. In FY12 because of a series of fall storms these OT accounts will be over budget. Out of grade pay line items are increased because of recent trends. Wa es FY12 FY13 Chan e Engineering $400,838. $410,059 +2.3% H &E ui . $735,051 $748,387 +1.6% Administration $252,891 $257,629 +1.9% Storm Water $142,463 $149,330 +4.8% Cemetery $145,661 $142,758 -2.0% Recreation $149,133 $151,509 +1.6% Pks & Forestry $463,673 $489,275 +5.5% Divisions $2,289,710 $2,348,947 +2.6% Snow /Lts/Trash $77,000 $112,000 +45.5% De artment $2,366,710 $2,460,947 +4.0% J J w The snow and ice budget has been increased by $35,000 to $600,000 total. In line with actual trends, all these new funds were added to the wage portion of this budget. Expenses — Divisions ($805,400; -3.8 %) Most line items are approximately level funded for FY13. The Engineering division has absorbed a $10,000 expense for traffic control repairs and maintenance that was previously in the Police expense budget. The Highway division eliminated a one- time $30,000 expense in the FY12 budget for pothole repair equipment and repairs. Department -wide professional development funding is increased in the Administration expense budget. Expenses FY12 FY13 Change Engineering $14,750 $23,750 +61.0% H &E ui . $728,930 $687,050 -5.7% Administration $4,550 $5,450 +19.8% Storm Water $7,000 $7,000 0.0% Cemetery $39;100 $39,100 0.0% Recreation $0 $0 0.0% Pks & Forestry $42,600 $43,050 +1.1% Divisions $836,930 $805,400 -3.8% Snow /Lts/Trash $2,213,734 $2,188,000 -1.2% Department $3,050,664 $2,993,400 -1.9% 03/30/2012 11:41 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 PUBLIC WORKS T'`�V' N GE READING, WA (TOWN OF READING NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS FY13 General Fund 2011 2012 2012 ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM PG 1 Ibgnyrpte PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 0411 ENGINEERING 03- SALARIES 14113511 511451 TOWN ENGNR 89,918.10 91,651.00 91,651.00. 66,718.50 91,651.00 93,490.00 2.0% 14113511 511452 SR CIV ENG 30,088.81 64,728.00 64,728.00 49,310.50 64,728.00 67,338.00 4.0% 14113511 511453 CVL ENGNR ' ' 155,585.01 127,097.00 127,097.00 94,977.20 127,097.00 129,665.00 2.0% 14113511 511454 AST CV ENG 51,163.20 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 14113511 511455 FLU TCH II ' 57,607.92 57,608.00 57,608.00 44,123.52 57,608.00 58,757.00 2.0% 14113511 511457 FLD TCH I 52,200.00 53,244.00 53,244.00 40,232.00 53,244.00 54,309.00 2.016 14113511 515000 OVERTIME 5,741.70 6,000.00 6,000.00 1,801.41 6,000.00 6,000.00 .0% A 14113511 516050 OUTOFGRADE 674.00 510.00 510.00 142.00 510.00 500.00 -2.0% TOTAL SALARIES 942,978:74 400,838.00 400,838.00 297,305.13 400,838.00 410,059.00 2.3% 05 EXPENSES 14115524 524250 TRAFFICTRL .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 10,000.00 .0% 14115530 530015 REVIEW SVC - 336.00 1,250.00 1,250.00 .00 1,250.00 1,250.00 .0% 14115530 530420 PLC DETAIL - 243.47 5,000.00 5,000.00 1,090.28 5,000.00 4,000.00 -20.0% 14115540 540000 SUPP /EQUIP ' 3,842.60 3,500.00 3,500.00 2,712.62 3,500.00 3,500.00 .0% 14115555 555000 TECH SUPP 4,597.17 4,500.00 4,500.00 3,916.58 4,500.00 4,500.00. .0% 14115578 578009 RCRDNG FEE 150.00 500.00 500.00 450.00 500.00 500.00 .0% TOTAL EXPENSES 8,010.30 14,750.00 14,750.00 8,169.48 19,750.00 23,750.00 61.0% TOTAL ENGINEERING 450,989.04 915,588.00 415,588.00 305,474.61 415, SBB.00 433,809.00 4.4% 0420 HIGHWAY & EQUIPMENT MAINT. 03 SALARIES 14203511 511401 SUPERVISOR 62,211.48 63,375.00 63,375.00 46,289.80 63,375.00 64,628.00 2.0% 03/30/2012 11:41 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 PUBLIC WORKS FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL T0WN "F RE AGING, Pvl A TOWN OF READING (NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM PG 2 Ibgnyrpts PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 14203511 511403 FOREMAN 61,909.20 63,142.00 63,142.00 47,892.24 63,142.00 65,042.00 3.0% 14203511 511405 WRKNG FRMN 91,960.37 93,873.00 93,873.00 71,981.40 93,873.00 96,696.00 3.0% 14203511 511409 EQUIP OPER 148,746.56 154,721.00 154,721.00 121,025.53 154,721.00 161,508.00 4.4% 14203511 511413 SKLLD LABR ' 33,495.00 40,988.00 40,988.00 .00 40,988.00 .00 - 100.0% 14203511 511417 LABORER - 50,137.11 52,669.00 52,669.00 62,910.75 52,669.00 88,802.00 68.6% 14203511 511421 MSTR MECH 56,075.52 57,191.00 57,191.00 43,378.17 57,191.00 58,903.00 -3.016 14203511 511423 MECH CLS I 12,431.25 47,898.00 47,898.00 22,243.20 47,898.00 50,321.00 5. 19, 14203511 511425 MCH CLS II 75,220.66 76,719.00 76,719.00 40,641.85 76,719.00 75,512.00 -1.6% 14203511 515000 OVERTIME 43,357.99 60,000.00 61,704.05 41,641.29 60,000.00 60,000.00 -2.8% 14203511 516050 OUTOFGRADE Cil 12,696.39 7,000.00 7,000.00 8,262.41 7,000.00 - 9,500.00 35.7% 14203511 516060 ONCALL PRM 12,688.00 12,400.00 12,400.00 8,750.00 12,400.00 12,400.00 .016 14203511 516080 LONGEVITY 4,860.00 5,075.00 5,075.00 4,860.00 5,075.00 5,075.00 .016 TOTAL SALARIES 665,789.53 735,051.00 736,755.05 519,876.64 735,051.00 748,387.00 1.6% 05 EXPENSES - 14205521 521309 WTR /SWR /SW 2,091.84 2,100.00 2,100.00 1,568.88 2,100.00 2,100.00 .09, 14205521 521392 WRLS PHONE 706.95 .11000.00 1,000.00 434.02 1,000.00 1,000.00 .0% 14205524 524305 EQUIP REP 92,566.15 110,000.00 110,000.00 87,982.52 110,000.00 110,000.00 .016 14205530 530000 PROF SVCS 7,380.21 7,000.00 7,000.00 7,542.26 7,000.00 7,000.00 .0% 14205530 530420 PLC DETAIL 17,641.59 6,500.00 6,500.00 14,871.19 6,500.00 81000.00 23.1% 14205530 530421 LINE PAINT 15,519.47 33,000.00 33,000.00 .00 33,000.00 33,000.00 .0% 14205540 540000 SUPP /EQUIP 6,720.24 8,000.00 8,000.00 6,283.15 81000.00 8,000.00 .0% f C" 03/30/2012 11:41 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 PUBLIC WORKS - FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL D 'ANN OF READiNC3C3 MA, TOWN OF READING (NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM PG 3 Ibgnyrpte PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 14205540 540225 EQUIPMENT .00 30,000.00 30,000.00 28,221.00 30,000.00 .00 - 100.0% 14205540 540408 PARTSMAINT - 186,309.91 185,000.00 185,000.00 144,695.10 185,000.00 185,000.00 .0% 14205540 540409 ST SIGNS - 7,859.19 6,000.00 6,000.00 9,428.56 6,000.00 10,000.00 66.7% 14205540 540410 SIDEWALKS 4,723.41 51000.00 5,000.00 3,837.13 5,000.00 5,000.00 .0% 14205540 540415 PARK AREAS 3,066.20 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 14205540 540460 HWY PATCH 28,358.34 30,000.00 30,000.00 18,237.50 30,000.00 30,000.00 :0% 14205548 548999 GASOLINE 151,457.02 296,330..00 296,330.00 134,135.75 296,330.00 280,000.00 -5.5% 14205554 554000 UNFRM /CLTH 7,725.85 8,250.00 8, 250.00 5,669.89 8,250.00 7,200.00 -12.7% 14205578 578100 LICENSES 690.00 750.00 750.00 611.50 750.00 750.00 .0% TOTAL EXPENSES 532,816.37 728,930.00 728,930.00 463,518.45 728,930.00 687,050.00 -5.7% TOTAL HIGHWAY L EQUIPMENT MA 1,198,605.90 1,463,981.00 1,465,685.05 983,395.09 1,463,981.00 1,435,437.00 -2.1% 0421 DPW - ADMINISTRATION 03 SALARIES 14213511 511001 DPW DIR 106,667.61 108,720.00 108,720.00 79,144.50 108,720.00 110,892.00 2.0% 14213511 511010 ADMIN ASST 43,489.80 44,318.00 44,318.00 32,262.00 44,318.00 45,199.00 2.0% 14213511 511012 CLERK 35,928.09 36,625.00 36,625.00 26,701.44 36,625.00 37,369.00 2.0% 14213511 511019 BSN ADMIN 61,199.16 62,366.00 62,366.00 45,400.50 62,366.00 63,619.00 2.0% 14213511 515000 OVERTIME 437.25 550.00 550.00 702.91 550.00 550.00 .0% 14213511 516050 OUTOFGRADE .00 312.00 312:00 .00 312.00 .00 - 100.03 TOTAL SALARIES 247,721.91 252,891.00 252,891.00 184,211.35 252,891.00 257,629.00 1.9 %- 05 EXPENSES 14215530 530100 ADVERTISIN .00 .00 .00 209.48 .00, 200.00 .0% 03/30/2012 11:41 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 PUBLIC WORKS FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL TJV N OF READING, Nt (TOWN OF READING NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM IPG 4 bgnyrpte PERIOD 99 'PCT CHANGE 14215531 531000 PRDEV TRN 4,302.25 2,500.00 2,500.00 3,767.25 2,500.00 3,300.00 32.0% 14215531 531091 PRDEV TRAV 35.00 50.00- 50.00 157.03 50.00 200.00 300.0% 14215540 540000 SUPP /EQUIP 1,521.49 - 2,000..00 2,000.00 197.00 2,000.00 1,750.00 -12.5% TOTAL EXPENSES ' _ 5,858.74 4,550.00 4,550.00 4,330.76 4,550.00 5,450.00 19.8% TOTAL DPW- ADMINISTRATION 253,580.65 257,441.00 257,441.00 188,542.11 257,441.00 263,079.00 2.2% 0428 STORM WATER MANAGEMENT 03 SALARIES 14283511 511401 SUPERVISOR 15,515.65 15,844.00 15,844.00 11,688.52 15,844.00 16,157.00 2.0% 14283511 511405 WRKNG FRMN J 10,522.00 11,008.00 11,008.00 8,575.69 11,008.00 11,338.00 3.0% 14283511 511409 EQUIP OPER 47,417.60 - - 50,906.00 50,906.00 .00 50,906.00 52,430.00 3.0% 14283511 511413- SKLD LABOR 44,945.26 43,008.00 43,008.00 63,242.63 43,008.00 45,257.00 5.2% 14283511 511417 LABORER 13;452.45 13,877.00 13,877.00 10,737.79 13,877.00 15,166.00 9.3% 14283511 511425 MECHANIC C 3,925.02 4,020.00 4,020.00 1,997.01 4,020.00 4,162.00 4.0% 14283511 515000 OVERTIME 7,684.32 450.00 450.00 6,484.84 450.00 450.00 .0% 14283511 516050 OUTOFGRADE 2,686.12 1,500.00 1,500.00 2,649.13 1,500.00 2,500.00 66.7% 14283511 516080 LONGEVITY 2,065.00 1,850.00 1,850.00 2,065.00 1,850.00 1,850.00 .0% TOTAL SALARIES 148,213.42 142,463.00 142,463.00 107,440.61 142,463.00 149.,330.00 4.8% 05 EXPENSES 14285530 530465 ST SWEEP 12,525.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 14285540 540000 SUPP /EQUIP 8,177.30 7,000.00 7,000.00 7,217.42 7,000.00 7,000.00 .0% 03/30/2012 11:41 blelacheur ' PROJECTION: 20131 PUBLIC WORKS FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL 0VVN OF REAGIN(:, MA (TOWN OF READING NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM IPG 5 bgnyrpte PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE TOTAL EXPENSES 20,702.30 7,000.00 7,000.00 7,217.42 7,000.00 7,000.00 .06 TOTAL STORM WATER MANAGEMENT 168,915.72 149,463.00 149,463.00 114,658.03 149,463.00 156,330.00 4..66 0491 CEMETERY 03 SALARIES 14913511 511401 SUPERVISOR 39,609.35 40,393.00 40,393.00 29,556.16 40,393.00 41,207.00 2.06 14913511 511403 FOREMAN ' 58,478.62 59,838.00 59,838.00 45,758.82 59,838.00 61,896.00 3.46 14913511 511409 EQUIP OPER 46,413.72 47,962.00 47,962.00 35,348.96 47,962.00 49,403.00 3.06 14913511 511413 SKID LABOR 39,375.97 41,823.00 41,823.00 .00 41,823.00 .00 - 100.06 14913511 511417 LABORER O0 27,448.12 31,445.00 31,445.00 47,578.16 31,445.00 66,052.00 110.16 14913511 515000 OVERTIME 8,583.93 6,500.00 6,500.00 7,108.35 6,500.00 6,500.00 -. 06 14913511 516050 OUTOFGRADE 3,409.92 2,750.00 2,750.00 2,453.82 2,750.00 2,750.00 .0% 14913511 516080_ LONGEVITY 1,950.00 1,950.00 11950.00 1,950.00 1,950.00 1,950.00 .06 14913511 596180 TRFND SUPP - 120,000.00 - 120,000.00 - 120,000.00 - 80,000.00 - 120,000.00 - 120,000.00 .0% 14913512 512000 WAGES TEMP 28,693.78 33,000.00 33,000.00 17,829.15 33,000.00 33,000.00 .0% TOTAL SALARIES 133,963.41 195,661.00 145,661.00 107,583.42 145,661.00 142,758.00 -2.06 05 EXPENSES 14915521 521301 ELECTRCTY 976.16 900.00 900.00 679.24 900.00 900.00 .0% 14915521 521308 FUEL OIL 1,614.27 1,800.00 1,800.00 1,140.27 1,800.00 1,800.00 .06 14915521 521309 WTR /SWR /SW 2,144.30 2,800.00 2,800.00 2,075.64 2,800.00 2,800.00 .0% 14915521 521392 WRLS PHONE 173.40 .00 .00 130.25 .00 .00 .O6 J tD 03/30/2012 11:41 blelacheur PROJECTIONt 20131 PUBLIC WORKS FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL 'TM,,VN OF READING, IVIA (TOWN OF READING NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM IPG 6 bgnyrpte PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 14915530 530000 PROF SVCS 4,990.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 14915530 596180 TRFND SUPP - - 5,500.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 14915540 540000 SUPP /EQUIP 3,234.65 6,000.00 6,000.00 5,176.54 6,000.00 6,000.00 .0% 14915540 540019 BLDG REPR 1,088.46 500.00 500.00 989.02 500.00 500.00 .0% 14915540 540440 GRAVELINRS 7,690.00 6,000.00 6,000.00 5,610.00 6,000.00 6,000.00 .0% 14915540 540441 FLAGMARKER 478.15 1,000.00 1,000.00 .00 1,000.00 1,000.00 .0% 14915540 540442 LOTREPURCH .00 2,000.00 2,000.00 .00 2,000.00 2,000.00 .0% 14915542 542000 OFFC SUPPL .00 200.00 200.00 28.01 200.00 200.00 .0% 14915546 546401 VETFLOWERS .00 4,700.00 4,700.00 .00 4,700.00 4,700.00 .0% 14915546 546405 MASONRY 1,386.34 2,000.00 2,000.00 899.20 2,000.00 2,000.00 .0% 14915546 546415 PLNTS /MLCH 487.00 600.00 600.00 .00 600.00 600.00 .0% 14915546 546420 CHEM /SEED 671.08 1,200.00 1,200.00 100.00 1,200.00 1,200.00 .0% 14915546 546440 TREES /SHRB - 353.46 400.00 400.00 .00 400.00 400.00 .0% 14915546 596180 TRFND SUPP .00 - 4,700.00 - 4,700.00 .00 - 4,700.00 - 4,700.00 .0% 14915548 548000 AUTOREPAIR 2,178.48 3,500.00 3,500.00 3,946.45 3,500.00 3,500.00 .0% 14915548 548999 GASOLINE 10,588.67 8,000.00 8,000.00 7,990.35 8,000.00 6,000.00 .0% 14915554 554000 UNFRM /CLTH 1;880.16 2,000.00 2,000.00 2,264.97 2,000.00 2,000.00 .0% 14915578 578100 LICENSES 330.00 200.00 200.00 185.00 200.00 200.00 .0% TOTAL EXPENSES 34,764.58 39,100.00 39,100.00 31,214.94 39,100.00 39,100.00 .0% TOTAL CEMETERY 168,727.99 184,761.00 184,761.00 138,798.36 184,761.00 181,858.00 -1.6% 0630 RECREATION 03 SALARIES 16303511 511003 REC ADMIN 68,917.62 70,236.00 70,236.00 51,129.00 70,236.00 71,645.00 2.0% 03/30/2012 11:41 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 PUBLIC WORKS FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL T0'vVN OF R E A Oil NG, MiA TOWN OF READING INEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM PG 7 bgnyrpts PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 16303511 511012 CLERK 33,205.12 33,846.00 33,846.00 24,638.33 33,846.00 34,511.00 2.0% 16303511 511473 PROG COORD 40,179.15 40,951.00 40,951.00 29,811.00 40,951.00 41,753.00 2.04 16303511 515000 OVERTIME 1,369.06 3,500.00 3,500.00 1,909.84 3,500.00 3,000.00 -14.3% 16303511 516050 OUTOFGRADE 249.77 600.00 600.00 485.08 600.00 600.00 .0% TOTAL SALARIES 143,920.72 149,133.00 149,133.00 107,973.25 149,133.00 151,509.00 1.6% TOTAL RECREATION 143,920.72 149,133.00 149,133.00 107,973.25 149,133.00 151,509.00 1.6% 0650 PARKS AND FORESTRY 03 SALARIES 1 N 16503511 511401 SUPERVISOR C3 39,609.37 40,393.00 40,393.00 29,562.17 40,393.00 41,207.00' 2.0$ 16503511 511403 FOREMAN 58,702.14 59,838.00 59,838.00 45,558.29 59,838.00 61,896.00 3.4% 16503511 511405 WRK FRMN 97,691.34 106,233.00 106,233.00 80,860.84 106,233.00 110,148.00 3.7% 16503511 511409 EQUIP OPER ' 47,070.44 51,256.00 51,256:00 34,341.71 51,256.00 47,007.00 -8.3% 16503511 511413 SKLD LBR 41,065.55 41,823.00 41,823.00 40,585.42 41,823.00 43,075.00 3.0% 16503511 511417 LABORER 68,876.72 71,551.00 71,551.00 45,292.50 71,551.00 75,941.00 6.1% 16503511 511431 TR CLMBR I 45,490.53 46,454.00 •46,454.00 35,372.39 46,454.00 47,956.00 3.2% 16503511 515000 OVERTIME 22,325.25 17,000.00 17,000.00 24,222.35 17,000.00 17,000.00 .0% 16503511 516050 OUTOFGRADE 8,321.04 6,000.00 - 6,000.00 4,380.85 6,000.00 6,000.00 .0% 16503511 516060 ONCALL PRM 4,392.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 3,988.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 .0% 16503511 516050 LONGEVITY 3,025.00 3,125.00 3,125..00 2,050.00 3,125.00 3,125.00 .0% . 16503512 512000 WAGES TEMP 31,527.40 15,000.00 15,000.00 11,895.36 15,000.00 30,920.00 106.1% 16503517 517017 SICK LEAVE 5,394.10 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% TOTAL SALARIES 473,490.88 463,673.00 463,673.00 05 EXPENSES 16505521 521301 'TOWN OF READING, MA 03/30/2012 11:41 828.69 TOWN OF READING 521309 blelacheur INEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS PROJECTION: 20131 FY13 General Fund WRLS PHONE PUBLIC WORKS 460.74 599.38 16505530 530000 2011 2012 2012 4,781.00 ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD TOTAL SALARIES 473,490.88 463,673.00 463,673.00 05 EXPENSES 16505521 521301 ELECTRCTY 540.36 828.69 16505521 521309 WTR /SWR /SW .0% 1,203.33 16505521 521392 WRLS PHONE 460.74 599.38 16505530 530000 PROF SVCS .0% 4,781.00 16505530 530420 PLC DETAIL .00 451.41 6,236.49 16505530 530431 STMP /BRSH .0% 4,076.00 N 16505530 530433 TURF TRTMT 9,781.74 3,820.85 16505530 596130 RVFND SUPP .0% - 17,979.00 16505540 540000 SUPP /EQUIP - 7,034.48 3,182.90 16505546 546410 SOIL /SOD 42.9% .00 16505546 546416 SHADE TREE 12,200.00 3,196.50 16505546 546420 CHEM /SEED 18.5% 3,690.01 16505546 546430 TOOLS 4,709.21 16505546 546450 GRAVEL 330.12 16505546 546460 ATHL FLDS - 18,000.00 5,010.50 16505546 546470 PLYGRD MLC 2.8% .00 16505554 554000 UNIFORMS 2,850.15 4,116.96 16505578 578100 LICENSES 1,140.00 TOTAL EXPENSES 2,500.00 28,942.94 TOTAL PARKS AND FORESTRY 1,250.00 502,433.82 TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS 4,000.00 2,887,173.84 4,000.00 GRAND TOTAL 2012 2012 ACTUAL PROJECTION 358,109.86 463,673.00 PG 8 bgnyrpte FOR PERIOD 99 2013 PCT 4- FINCOM CHANGE 489.275.00 5.5% 1,000.00 1,000.00 540.36 1,000.00 1,000.00 .0% 600.00 600.00 460.74 600.00 600.00 .0% .00 .00 451.41 .00 .00 .0% 7,500.00 7,500.00 9,781.74 7,500.00 7,500.00 .0% 3,500.00 3,500.00 - 7,034.48 3,500.00 5,000.00 42.9% 13,500.00 13,500.00 12,200.00 13,500.00 16,000.00 18.5% 3,500.00 3,500.00 .00 3,500.00 - 3,500.00 .096 - 18,000.00 - 18,000.00 - 18,000.00 - 18,000.00 - 18,500.00 2.8% 2,500 -.00 2,500.00 2,850.15 2,500.00 2,500.00 .0% 2,500.00 2,500.00 .00 2,500.00 1,250.00 -50.0% 4,000.00 4,000.00 3,979.50 4,000.00 4,000.00 .0% 4,000.00 4,000.00 1,987.22 4,000.00 4,000.00 .0% 4,000.00 4,000.00 3,323.44 4,000.00 4,000.00 .0% 1,400.00 1,400.00 136.59 1,400.00 1,000.00 -28.6% 4,000.00 4,000.00 3,096.00 4,000.00 4,000.00 .0% 4,000.00 4,000.00 .00 4,000.00 2,000.00 -50.0% 4,000.00 4,000.00 2,150.00 4,000.00 4,600.00 15.0% 600.00 600.00 887.00 600.00 600.00 .0% 42,600.00 42,600.00 30,878.63 42,600.00 43,050.00 1.1% 506,273.00 506,273.00 388,988.51 506,273.00 532,325.00 5.1% 3,126,640.00 3,128,344.05 2,227,829.96 3,126,640.00 3,154,347.00 .8% J N N SNOW AND ICE EXPENDITURE HISTORY through April 3, 2012 Fiscal government relief programs: _ Initial Over I (Under) 120,986 Net Cost $ Year Expenditure Federal: $87,232 Appropriation 87,232 Appropriation Federal: $121.340 to Town 121,340 2016 Federal: $146,721 $ $ 675,000 Federal: $99,676 $ 99,676 2015 $ 650,000 400 2014 $ 625,000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2013 6 Spending (Budget $ 600,000 2012 $ 308,085 $ 565,000 $ (256,915) $ 308,086 2011 $ 1,017,872 $ 525,000 $ 492,872 (6) $ 918,196 2010 $ 754,088 $ 500,000 $ 254,088 $ 754,088 2009 $ 1,149,375 $ 450,000 $ . 699,375 $ 1,149,375 2008 $ 992,014 $ 400,000 $ 592,014 $ 992,014 2007 $ 465,017 $ 334,727 $ 130,290. $ 465,017 - 2006 $ 581,635 $ 324,682 $ 256,953 $ 681,635 2005 $ 1,083,809 $ 307,086 $ 776,723 (5) $ 937,088 2004 $ 507,271 $ 276,547 $ 230,724 (4) $ 385,931 2003 $ 576,300 $ 251,100 $ 325,200 (3) $ 489 O6B 2002 $ 214,155 $ 251,100 $ (36,945) $ 214,155 2001 $ 636,100 $ 226,100 $ 410,000 (2) $ 655,183 2000 $ 252,219 $ 197,419 $ 54,800 $ 262,219 1999 $ 291,176 $ 192,301 $ 98,875 $ 291,176 ' 1998 $ 283,856 $ 187,467 $ 96,389 $ 283,856 1997 $ 284,442 $ 182,058 $ 102,384 $ 284,442 1996 $ 677,475 $ 177,614 $ 499,861 (1) $ 566,489 - 1995 $ 136,935 $ 175,000 $ (38,065) $ 136,935 1994 $ 428,680 $ 110,000 $ 318,680 $ 428,680 1993 $ 344,416 $ 110,000 $ 234,416 $ 344,416 1992 $ 91,347 $ 150,000 $ (58,653) $ 91,347 1991 $ 128,915 $ 150,000 $ (21,085) $ 128,915 AVERAGES through 2012: 5 -year $844,287 $488,000 $356,287 $824,352 5 -year 10 -year $743,647 $393,414 $350,132 1 $698,050 10 -year 20 -year $549,246 $287,160 $262,086 1 $616,402 20 -year The following reimbursements are noted from Federal and State government relief programs: (1) Federal: $59,863 and State: $61,123 $ 120,986 (2) Federal: $80,917 $ '80,917 (3) Federal: $87,232 $ 87,232 (4) Federal: $121.340 $ 121,340 (5) Federal: $146,721 $ 146,721 (6) Federal: $99,676 $ 99,676 Snow & Ice 20 +yr History 1.400 � a 1.200 s• _ 1,000 ,j. ^ 800 0 e00 400 200 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 FY12 )far left) 6 Spending (Budget 04/02/2012 14:04 TOWN OF READING blelacheur (NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS PROJECTION: 20131 FY13 General Fund DPW -TRASH SNOW STREET LIGHTING 2011 2012 2012 ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 0423 SNOW / ICE CONTROL 03 SALARIES 12,000.00 14233511 511000 WAGES PERM 12,000.00 11,031.01 - 14233511 515000 OVERTIME 65,000.00 48,989.86 199,382.50 65,000.00 TOTAL SALARIES 100,000.00 53.8% 210,413.51 05 EXPENSES 54,588.52, 14235530 530415 PLOW /HAUL - 45.S% 376,188.25 200,000.00 14235530 530420 PLC DETAIL N 14,282.82 14235530 530465 ST SWEEP W 10,000.00 00 14235540 540000 SUPP /EQUIP 10,000.00 236,997.34 .O% 14235540 540430 SALT .00 �. .00 101,501.70 .00 14235540 540435 CACL .0% 250,000.00 .00 14235548 548999 GASOLINE 200,000.00 69,586.49 14235578 578020 MEALS .00 131,480.09 6,902.00 .00 TOTAL EXPENSES .00 .0% .00 807,458.60 TOTAL SNOW / ICE CONTROL .00 1,017,872.11 .00 0424 STREET LIGHTING 28,000.00 05 EXPENSES 27,560.68 2012 2012 ACTUAL PROJECTION PG 1 bgnyrpte FOR PERIOD 99 2013 PCT 4- FINCON CHANGE 12,000.00 12,000.00 5,598.66 12,000.00 12,000.00 - .0% 65,000.00 65,000.00 48,989.86 65,000.00 100,000.00 53.8% 77,000.00 77,000.00 54,588.52, 77,000.00 112,000.00 - 45.S% 200,000.00 200,000.00 34,124.50 200,000.00 235,000.00 17.56 10,000.00 10,000.00 .00 10,000.00 10,000.00 .O% .00 .00 .00 .00 15,000.00 .0% 250,000.00 250,000.00 54,761.61 250,000.00 200,000.00 -20.0% .00 .00 131,480.09 .00 .00 .0% .00 .00 3,240.00 .00 .00 .0% 28,000.00 28,000.00 27,560.68 28,000.00 28,000.00 .0% .00 .00 1,773.00 .00 .00 .0% 488,000.00 488,000.00 252,939.88 488,000.00 488,000.00 .0% 565,000.00 565,000.00 307,528.40 565,000.00 600,000:00 6.2% 14245521 521300 TTLGT ELEC 9,271.97 16,170.00 16,170.00 6,306.45 16,170.00 16,000.00 -1.1% 14245521 521301 STLGT ELEC 205,164.79 237,405.00 187,405.00 97,957.78 237,405.00 184,000.00 -1.8% 04/02/2012 14:04 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 FY13 General DPW - TRASH SNOW STREET LIGHTING 2011 ACTUAL TOWN OF READING (NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM PG 2 bgnyrpts PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE TOTAL EXPENSES 214,436.76 253,575.00 203,575.00 104,264.23 253,575.00 200,000.00 -1.8% TOTAL STREET LIGHTING 214,436.76 253,575.00 203,575. -00 104,264.23 253,575.00 200,000.00 -1.8% 0433 WASTE COLLECTION & DISPOSAL' 05 EXPENSES 14335529 529430 GB COLLECT 669,750.19 639,500.00 639,500.00 608,335.00 639,500.00 650,000.00 1.6% 14335529 529431 GB DISPOSE 436,441.27 608,599.00 608,599.00 455,160.13 608,599.00 575,000.00 -5.5% 14335529 529432 CURB RECYC 195,895.38 195,500.00 195,500.00 180,750.04 195,500.00 210,000.00 7.416 14335529 529435 MISC RECYC 52,445.41 28,560.00 28,560.00 13,979.55 28,560.00 65,000.00 127.6% N 14335530 530086 MONITORING ? 2,063.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% TOTAL EXPENSES 1,356,595.25 1,472,159.00 1,472,159.00 1,258,224.72 1,472,159.00 115001000.00 1.9% TOTAL WASTE COLLECTION & DIS 1,356,595.25 1,472,159.00 1,472,159.00 1,258,224.72 1,472,159.00 1,500,000.00 1.9% TOTAL DPW -TRASH SNOW STREET 2,588,904.12 2,290,734.00 2,240,734.00 1,670,017.35 2,290,734.00 2,300,000.00 2.6% GRAND TOTAL 2,588,904.12 2,290,734.00 2,240,734.00 1,670,017.35 2,290,734.00 2,300,000.00 2.6% ** END OF REPORT - Generated by Bob LeLacheur ** N cn Public Safety FY13 Budgets Overview The Public Safety budget consists of the Police Department, Fire /Emergency Management Department and the shared Dispatch. Each year Town Meeting votes both a total salary and expense line for the combination of all three functions. The total budget for Public Safety for FY13 is $8,470,477 which is a 6.4% increase from the FY12 budget: Wages There are 2.5 additional full -time equivalent personnel added to the Police department budget. One is a new officer hired to assist in the substance abuse prevention effort, and the remainder are the existing Reading Coalition Against Substance Abuse (RCASA) civilian staff that have been paid by a federal grant for almost five years. The grant expires on October 1, 2012 and therefore this budget funds the two positions for nine months each. An application to renew the grant for another five years has been filed. At November 2012 Town Meeting either the remaining three months will be added to the budget as a. baseline if the grant application is unsuccessful, or the nine months funding will be removed if the application is successful. In addition, another Police Officer is anticipated to be added to this budget at this time once the Assessors certify new commercial growth. Wages FY12 FY13 Change Police $3,795,866 $4,134,830 +8.9% Fire/ EMS $3,741,872 $3,909,707 +4.5% Dispatch $423,545 $425,940 +0.6% TOTAL $7,961,283 $8,470,477 +6.4% Wages There are 2.5 additional full -time equivalent personnel added to the Police department budget. One is a new officer hired to assist in the substance abuse prevention effort, and the remainder are the existing Reading Coalition Against Substance Abuse (RCASA) civilian staff that have been paid by a federal grant for almost five years. The grant expires on October 1, 2012 and therefore this budget funds the two positions for nine months each. An application to renew the grant for another five years has been filed. At November 2012 Town Meeting either the remaining three months will be added to the budget as a. baseline if the grant application is unsuccessful, or the nine months funding will be removed if the application is successful. In addition, another Police Officer is anticipated to be added to this budget at this time once the Assessors certify new commercial growth. Wages FY12 FY13 Change Police $3,594,381 $3,915,430 +8.9% Fire /EMS $3,614,943 $3,778,882 +4.5% Dispatch $385,945 $398,240 +3.2% TOTAL $7,595,269 $8,092,552 +6.5% Expenses Each Public Safety function has comparatively small expenses. In FY13 an annual software license cost for a now combined Police & Fire system has been consolidated in the Finance /Technology budget with other broad systems. See the budget sections on Police, Fire /EMS and Dispatch for more information. N rn Police Department FY13 Budget Overview The Reading Police Department budget for FY13 is funded at $4,134,830 or +8.9% when compared to FY12. Approximately 95% of this budget is personnel costs, with only 5% spent on expenses. The FY13 department is budgeted for 41 sworn personnel (an increase of one), 3 civilian office employees, 1 civilian part-time Animal Control Officer and part-time Parking Enforcement Officer, and 1.5 employees from the Reading Coalition Against Substance Abuse (RCASA) that were previously funded by a 5 -year federal grant. Staffing (46.5 FTEs; +2.5 or +5.7 %) Wages ($3,915,430; +8.9 %) The FY13 Police salary budget reflects an overall increase of 8.9% and is driven by these major factors: - One additional officer; - The assumption that a 5 -year federal grant for 1.5 FTE RCASA employees will expire on 10/1/12; - Overtime is increased by 12.3% reflecting past history and planned increased activity by the department; Assumptions for FY13 include potential union contractual obligations, negotiations are still underway. In conjunction with the Reading Public Schools and Reading Coalition Against Substance Abuse (RCASA) the Police Department has asked for an increase in staffing in order to take a more proactive approach towards areas that have presented issues in our community recently. As predicted last year, demands for additional investigative overtime and court appearances have occurred. We have eliminated most discretional overtime such as Tree Lighting, Friends and Family Day, the RAD program and other events in the FY12 budget and do not include them in FY13 budget. Although the statistics show a very slight decrease in the major crime categories below, we have also experienced some very serious violent crimes in the past year. These particular experiences have led us into an area that will demand more aggressive investigative initiatives. - All current trends in the substance area indicate the issue will not be going away and most likely will become more impactful in the near future. 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 -ME'S -i- LARCENY 3 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 -ME'S -i- LARCENY N Both Robberies and Sexual Assaults show a slight decrease in the past year. While some common police service requests are within historical averages, many others are still trending upward including Marijuana Citations (possession under 1 oz.) which recorded 77 offenses in 2011, just another indicator in the substance issue. 25 20 t ROBBERY 15 10 t SEXUAL AssAULT 5 0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 #311 s t � �'� o R`.t o,fy 3 p"P{S'i'W�I L�b, .. y. R^ Ch A Expenses ($219,400; +8.9 %) The department's expense budget has been increased by almost $18,000 or 8.9 %. Most of that increase is caused by a non- recurring cost of $10,000 needed to outfit two new police officers — one due to a retirement and one an addition to the force. An increase of over $13,000 in vehicle replacement is needed due to the discontinuation of the Ford Crown Victoria model and subsequent one -time costs to outfit new cruiser models with department equipment. A $10,200 decrease is attributable to the transfer of traffic control repair responsibilities to the Public Works /Engineering Division. Professional development expenses are increased but below levels from previous years. Other expenses are generally level funded. 03/30/2012 13:51 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 POLICE FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL TCvVN 0 REvDING, l:AA TOWN OF READING INEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM PG 1 Ibgnyrpte PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 03 SALARIES 12103511 511003 POL CHIEF ' 134,284.86 136,534.00 136,534.00 99,913.22 136,534.00 139,265.00 2.0% 12103511 511012 CLERK 82,444.89 85,858.00 85,858.00 61,492.15 85,858.00 87,575.00 2.0% 12103511 511231 LIEUTENANT 297,065.76 299,167.00 299,167.00 225,799.78 299,167.00 313,300.00 4.7% 12103511 511232 SERGEANT 614,092.12 619,371.00 619,371.00 467,066.71 619,371.00 644,800.00 4.1% 12103511 511233 OFFICER 1,511,108.15 1,664,276.00 1,664,276.00 1,249,092.03 1,664,276:00 1,756,951.00 5.6% 12103511 511234 DETECTIVE 306,333.93 307,693.00 307,693.00 232,031.04 307,693.00 395,850.00 2B.7% 12103511 511235 PARK ENFOR 16,302.09 16,631.00- 16,631.00 12,171.74 16,631.00 16,964.00 2.0% 12103511 511236 ANIM CONTR N 15,987.81 16,307.00 16,307.00 11,932.08 16,307.00 16,633.00 2.0% 12103511 511237 BSN ADMIN 67,514.34 68,865.00 68,865.00 50,395.38 68,865.00 70,242.00 2.0% 12103511 511238 SCHL TRAFF - 115,755.68 120,929.00 120,929.00 80,425.25 120,929.00 120,000.00 -.8% 12103511 511521 RCASA OC .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 15,865.00 .0% 12103511 511569 RCASA DIR .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 52,485.00 .0% 12103511 515000 OVERTIME - 298,982.22 236,000.00 236,000.00 194,844.06 - 236,000.00 265,000 -.00 12.3% 12103511 515210 TRAINING 16,197.94 10,000.00 10,000.00 1,016.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 ..0% 12103511 515220 FLSA 2,470.26 .00 .00 .00 .00 - .00 .0% 12103511 516210 FITNESS ST 4,500.00 8,250.00 8,250.00 2,250.00 8,250.00 6,000.00 -27.3% 12103512 512205 CELL MONIT 2,486.47 4,500.00 4, 500.00 968.36 4,500.00 4,500.00 .0% TOTAL SALARIES 3,485,526.52 3,594,381.00 3,594,381.00 2,689,397.80 3,594,381.00 3,915,430.00 6.9% 05 EXPENSES 12105521 521392 WIRLS SVC 13,369.90 12,200.00 12,200.00 10,605.61 12,200.00 12,500.00 2 .5% 03/30/2012 13:51 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 POLICE PY13 General 2011 ACTUAL TOWN OF READINGS, NIA (TOWN OF READING NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM IPG 2 bgnyrpts PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 12105524 524001 VEH REPAIR 14,627.87 10,000.00 10,000.00 5,006.89 10,000.00 10,000.00 .0% 12105524 524201 WEAPONS 6,969.98 9,200.00 9,200.00 5,710.04 9,200.00 9,200.00 .0% . 12105524 524250 TRF CTL RP 8,829.67 10,200.00 10,200.00 18,230.34 10,200.00 .00 - 100.0& 12105524 524271 EQUIPMENT 3,229.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 600.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 .0% 12105530 530000 PROF SVCS .00 .00 .00 13.75 - .00 .00 .0% 12105530 530422 KENNEL BRD .00 900.00 900.00 402.05 900.00 900.00 .0% 12105530 530423 SPC INVEST 189.81 400.00 400.00 368.89 400.00 500.00 25.0% 12105531 531000 PRDEV TRN 1,091.30 2,300.00 2,300.00 2,891.72 2,300.00 2,300.00 .0% 12105531 531010 PRDEV DUES 11,152.00 9,500.00 9,500.00 9,287.00 9,500.00 11,000.00 15.8% 12105531 531090 PRDEV -REG N 2,827.45 1,500.00 1,500.00 627.00 1,500.00 1,700.00 13.3% co 12105531 531091 PRDEV TRAV 3,971.10 1,100.00 1,100.00 612.55 1,100.00 1,200.00 9.1% 12105531 531210 OFFCR TRN 7,397.00 4,800.00 4,800.00 2,056.00 4,800.00 5,000.00 4.2% 12105535 535300 RCASA EVNT .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 400.00 .0% 12105540 540000 SUPP /EQUIP 7,294.03 1,500.00 1,500.00 632.30 1,500.00 1,600.00 6.7% 12105540 540221 COMM EQUIP 2,536.28 13,000.00 13,000.00 3,198.99 13,000.00 12,500.00 -3.8% 12105540 540231 RADAR UNIT 1,063.37 3,500.00 3,500.00 703.00 3,500.00 3,500.00 .0% 12105540 540281 PRKPRGSUPP 3,901.00 8,000.00 8,000.00 4,350.20 8,000.00 8,000.00 .09d 12105540 540282 PS SUPP 3,662.73 5,000.00 5,000.00 4,508.83 5,000.00 5,000.00 :0% 12105542 542000 OFFC SUPPL 9,235.25 9,200.00 9,200.00 9,458.33 9,200.00 9,200.00 .0% 12105542 542120 FURNISHING .00 1,000.00 1,000.00 .00 1,000.00 1,000.00 .0% 12105542 542125 COPY SUPP 1,891.02 2,900.00 2,900.00 - 2,337.00 2,900.00 3,000.00 3.4% 12105542 542127 POSTAGE 1,374.80 11385.00 1,385.00 - 1,008.04 1,385.00 1,400.00 1.1% J W C3 ** END OF REPORT - Generated by Bob LeLacheur ** TOWN i)F READING, IMIA 03/30/2012 13:51 OF READING 3 blelacheur ITONN NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS IPG bgnyrpte PROJECTION: 20131 FY13 General Fund FOR PERIOD 99 POLICE 2011 2012 2012 2012 2012 2013 PCT ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD ACTUAL PROJECTION 4- FINCOM CHANGE 12105554 554000 UNFRM /CLTH 33,441.16 35,000.00 35,000.00 35,643.08 35,000.00 45,000.00 28.6% 12105558 558545 RCASASUPPL .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 500.00 .0% 12105578 578000 OTHER EXPN 68.95 .00 .00 _ .00 .00 .00 .0% 12105578 578250 FOOD PRSNR 140.00 400.00 400.00 274.65 400.00 500.00 25.016 12105578 578545 RCASA OTHE .00 .00 .00 -.00 .00 500.00 .0% 12105580 580250 CRUISERS 58,667.25 56,500.00 56,500.00 30,854.90 56,500.00 71,000.00 25.7% TOTAL EXPENSES 198,930.92 201,485.00 201,485.00 149,381.16 201,485.00 219,400.00 8.9% TOTAL POLICE 3,684,457.44 3,795,866.00 3,795,866.00 2,838,778.96 3,795,866.00 4,134,830.00 8.9% GRAND TOTAL - 3,684,457.44 3,795,866.00 3,795,866.00 2,838,778.96 3,795,866.00 4,134,830.00 8.9% ** END OF REPORT - Generated by Bob LeLacheur ** W Fire and Emergency Management FY13 Budget Overview The FY13 budget will retain staffing and response at present levels. The salary accounts have been increased to reflect contractual increases and step increases for non union personnel, as well as another significant increase to the Overtime line in an attempt to fully fund that cost as if the department were fully staffed. It is important-when looking at historical figures for OT to realize that sometimes other wage line items are spent at lower rates than budgeted — for example because of a vacancy. Expenses have been level funded except for ambulance service costs which are influenced by medical inflation. The total FY13 Fire /EMS budget is $3,909,707, up 4.5% from FYI and a similar increase to last year. The Reading Fire Department's 48 full time employees are primarily organized around four Groups of Officers and Firefighters. The budget requests the funding of a Chief, Secretary, four Captains, five Lieutenants, thirty seven Firefighters and two part time Fire Alarm Technicians. Our major responsibilities are: Delivery of Emergency Medical Services; Fire Suppression; Fire Prevention and Emergency Management Fire activity for the year 2011 The chart (figure 1) below illustrates our fire response data for 2011 and is based upon mandatory National Fire Incident Reporting requirements. Fire Response ByCatagory Brush Fire Motor Vehicle Fire Heating Equipment Fire Chimney or Flue Fire Cooking Fire structure Fire Mutual Aid Fire Other Figure 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 In 2011 we responded to 249 fires that were required to be reported to the State Fire Marshal, of these, 174 were classified as structure fires. The leading fire cause was cooking related and this is consistent with State data. CA) N Emergency Medical Activity for 2011 Although requests for emergency medical treatment have remained constant for the last four years, when the response data is reviewed for the past 15 years we see a rising trend. Our highest year for emergency medical responses occurred in 2006 when we responded to 1,997 requests for treatment. Our emergency medical responses for 2011 were 1,978. See figure 2. EMS Runs 1996 to 2011 2,200 2,000 1,800 � lsoo � 1,400 W 1,200 1,000 - 800 1996 2001 2006 2011 Year Figure 2 Staffing (48 FTEs; no change) Wage costs ($3,778,882; ±4.5 %) Fire Overtime has been increased by $30,000 ( +9.2 %). This amount was requested to have this account reflect the anticipated overtime needs. The overtime budget is used to maintain proper staffing due to illnesses, injuries and mandatory training. Without this increase, the wage budget is up 3.7 %. Expenses ($130,825; +3.1%) As of this writing, a decision has not yet been made on outsourcing the ambulance billing function for $25,000. An unplanned higher priority of replacing the entire. Fire Department software system arose during the year. After a public bid process, Microsystems — the vendor that provides the Police and Dispatch software system — was selected. The software license cost for these combined systems was moved to the Finance/Technology expense budget. Within a couple of years this combined system is expected to save time by eliminating duplicate entry by Dispatch, as well as provide insightful management reports. Outsourcing the ambulance billing function will be examined once this new system is operational. This is expected to be by June 30, 2012. W W 03/30/2012 13:54 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 FIRE FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL f 'v%vN OF READING, I\i%!A (TOWN OF READING NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM PG 1 bgnyrpte PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 03 SALARIES 12203511 511003 FIRE CHIEF - 111,377.51 108,303.00. - 108,303.00 83,551.68 108,303.00 110,469.00 2.0% 12203511 511009 ADM ASST 43,456.50 44,148.00 44,148.00 32,428.50 44,148.00 45,030.00 2.0% 12203511 511241 CAPTAIN 350,790.28 347,647.00 347,647.00 266,252.74 347,647.00 365,743.00 5.2% , 12203511 511242 LIEUTENANT 341,828.99 357,227.00 357,227.00 271,945.4.7 357,227.00 370,709.00 3.8% 12203511 511243 FIREFIGHTR 2,163,626.85 2,216,565.00 2,216,565.00 1,658,410.88 2,216,565.00 2,307;168.00 4.1% 12203511 511246 FIRE ALARM 10,096.38 8,000.00 8,000.00 12,988.08 8,000.00 8,000.00 .O% 12203511 515000 OVERTIME 421,412.06 325,000.00 325,000.00 285,338.05 325,000.00 355,000.00 9.2% 12203511 515200 HOLDAY PAY 175,012.89 189,921.00 189,921.00 147,412.62 189,921.00 197,906.00 4.2% 12203517 517017 SCK LV BBK _ .00 18,132.00 18,132.00 9,272.99 18,132.00 18,857.00 4.0% TOTAL SALARIES 3,617,601.46 3,614,943.00 3,614,943.00 2,767,601.01 3,614,943.00 3,778,682.00 4.546 05 EXPENSES 12205521 521392 WRLS'PHONE 863.24 .00 .00 549.58 .00 .00 .0% 12205524 524270 RADIO MNT 5,775.66 - 2,250.00 2,250.00 963.66 2,250.00 2,250.00 .0% 12205524 524271 EQUIPMENT 7,899.14 3,500.00 3,500.00 2,737.44 3,500.00 3,500.00 .0% 12205524 524273 APARATREPR 1,423.63 1,075.00 1,075.00 183.80 1,075.00 1,075.00 .0% 12205524 524275 FRE ALRM M - 474.12 2,000.00 2,000.00 3,460.25 2,000.00 2,000.00 .096 12205524 524276 HOSE RPLCM 979.95 1,029.00 1,029.00 .00 1,029.00 1,000.00 -2.8% 12205530 530022 BILLINGSVC ' .00 25,000.00 25,000.00 .00 25,000.00 - 25,000.00 .0% 12205531 531000 PRDEV TRN 100.00 .00 .00 329.55 .00 .00 .0% 12205531 531010 PRDEV DUES 2,500.00 3,000.00 3,000.00 3,244.95 3,000.00 3,000.00 .0% J W �A 03/30/2012 13:54 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 FIRE FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL TOWN OF READING, MA TOWN OF READING (NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCOM PG 2 Ibgnyrpta PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 12205531 531050 PUBLCTNS 520.70 275.00 275.00 145.75 275.00 500.00 81.8% 12205531 531090 PRDEV REG 709.00 900.00 900.00 .00 900.00 '900.00 .0% 12205531 531220 FFGHTR TRN 3,698.86 6,000.00 6,000.00 3,955.25 61000.00 6,000.00 .0% 12205540 540000 SUPP %EQUIP ' 1,334.87 4,500.00 4,500.00 214.13 4,500.00 4,000.00 -11.1% 12205540 540225 EQUIPMENT 360.67 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 12205542 542000 OFFC SUPPL 1,641.02 2,000.00 2,000.00 2,080.41 2,000.00 2,000.00 12205550 550000 ALS SUPP - ..0% 28,810.60 32,000.00 32,000.00 20,660.23 32,000.00 32,000.00 .0 %, 12205550 550290 AMBUL SRVC 10,205.96 10,400.00 10,400.00 13,105.96 10,400.00 13,700.00 31.7% 12205554 554000 UNFRM /CLTH 28,011.98 29,450.00 29,450.00 29,450.00 29,450.00 30,500.00 3.6% 12205554 554220 PRTCT CLTH - 710.94 2,400.00 2,400.00 472.00 2,400.00 2,400.00 .0% 12205578 578000 OTHER EXPN 874.08 1,150.00 1,150.00 523.82 1,150.00 1,000.00 - 13.'0% 12205578 578062 FLAGS 306.09 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% TOTAL EXPENSES 94,830.39 126,929.00 - 126,929 -.00 82,076.78 126,929.00 130,825.00 3.196 TOTAL FIRE 3,712,431.85 3,741,872.00 3,741,872.00 2,849,677.79 3,741,872.00 3,909,707.00 4.5% GRAND TOTAL 3,712,431.85 3,741,872.00 3,741,872.00 2,849,677.79 3,741,872.00 3,909,707.00 4.5% ** END OF REPORT - Generated by Bob LeLacheur ** w CA Dispatch FY13 Budget Overview The Reading Dispatch budget for FYI is funded at $425,940, a 0.6% increase compared with FY12. Approximately 93% of this budget is spent on wages, with the remaining 7% on expenses. Dispatch currently is staffed with eight civilian Dispatch personnel and one civilian Head Dispatcher who works several shifts per week as a Dispatcher and oversees the administration of the Dispatch center. It is important to note that there have been many new demands placed on the professional Dispatch centers including required Dispatch Certification and required Emergency Medical Dispatch. The Reading Dispatch Center is in compliance and was already meeting the standards prior to their implementation. The Town is actively involved in a grant funded study to explore the feasibility of regionalizing our Dispatch services. Staffing (9 FTEs; no change) Wages ($398,240; +3.2 %) The Dispatch wage budget has been increased by 1.6% in higher costs and another 1.6% by trimming the State 911 support.grant. Grant funds have been partly diverted by the legislature to fund regionalization studies. Figure 1, below summarizes the volume of services being provided by our Dispatch in support of Police, Fire, EMS, and other town initiatives. The complexity of work, as mentioned in the Police narrative, is not reflected in the Calls for Service and total log entries as both remain consistent. 2005 2007 2008 2009 - 2010 2011 Expenses ($27,700; - 26.3 %) Log entries tCnlls Por service Dispatch expenses are being reduced primarily because $16,000 is moved into the Finance /Technology expense budget to cover a combined Police /Fire /Dispatch Public Safety software system. A State 911 support grant offset is being eliminated in the expense budget due to unpredictable funding. ' ' -' Tt -78905 �19891 20240.;.20180; - r• -r. 10000 2 1 +�: C j is000 „x i i0000 --4 0 2005 2007 2008 2009 - 2010 2011 Expenses ($27,700; - 26.3 %) Log entries tCnlls Por service Dispatch expenses are being reduced primarily because $16,000 is moved into the Finance /Technology expense budget to cover a combined Police /Fire /Dispatch Public Safety software system. A State 911 support grant offset is being eliminated in the expense budget due to unpredictable funding. J w 01 03/30/2012 13:55 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20131 DISPATCHERS (NEXT FY13 General 2011 ACTUAL TOWN OF READING, IMA TOWN OF READING YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Fund 2012 2012 ORIG HUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 4- FINCON PG 1 bgnyrpts PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 03 SALARIES - 12153511 511000 WAGES PERM 329,490.23 339,554.00 339,554.00 201,460.13 339,554.00 343,905.00 1.34 12153511 511003 HEAD DISP 55,982.31 57,191.00 57- ,191.00 41,851.97 57,191.00 58,335.00 2.04 12153511 515000 OVERTIME ' 42,330.96 43,200.00 43,200.00 30,626.53 .43,200.00 44;000.00 1.98 12153511 515210 TRAINING 1,189.28 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .04 12153511 596120 ST GR SUPP - 40,000.00 - 56,000.00 - 56,000.00 .00 - 56,000.00 - 50,000.00 -10.74 12153512 512000 WAGES TEMP ' 1,452.13 2,000.00 2,000.00 1,317.63 2,000.00 2,000.00 .04 TOTAL SALARIES 390,494.91 385,945.00 385,995.00 275,256.26 385,995.00 398,240.00 3.24 05 EXPENSES 12155524 524000 MAINT /REPR 1,603.00 .00 .00 155.00 .00 .00 .04 12155524 524260 VIDEO SURV 1,577.50 1,500.00 1,500.00 2,047.50 1,500.00 2,000.00 33.34 12155524 524271 EQUIP M &R 3,413.01 4,000.00 4,000.00 2,500.00 4,000.00 5,000.00 25.04 12155531 531000 PRDEV TRN 543.31 .00 .00 853.03 .00 750.00 .04 12155531 531091 PRDEV TRAV 110.45 .00 .00 77.56 .00 250.00 .04 12155536 536000 LIC SFTWR 4,693.90 18,000.00 18,000.00 16,802.00 18,000.00 2,000.00 -88.94 12155536 596120 ST GR SUPP .00 - 2,500.00 - 2,500.00 .00 - 2,500.00 .00 - 100.04 12155540 540221 COMM EQUIP 13,194.32 5,000.00 5,000.00 3,902.00 5,000.00 6,000.00 20.04 12155542 542000 OFFC SUPPL 1,467.47 2,100.00 2,100.00 1,800.00 2,100.00 2,200.00 4.84 . 12155554 554000 UNFRM /CLTH 2,160.00 2,500.00 2,500.00 2,204.99 2,500.00 2,500.00 .04 12155555 555000 TECH SUPP 8,154.06 6,000.00 6,000.00 2,838.84 6,000.00 6,000.00 .04 12155580 580000 EQUIP OPER .00 1,000.00 1,000.00 .00 1,000.00 1,000.00 .04 TOTAL EXPENSES 36,917.02 37,600.00 37,600.00 33,180.92 37,600.00 27,700.00 - -26:34 TOTAL DISPATCHERS 427,361.93 423,545.00 423,545.00 308,437.18 423,545.00 425,940.00 .64 READING PUBLIC SCHOOLS School Committee Budget Fiscal Year 2013 Respectfully Submitted to the Town of Reading By the Reading School Committee February, 2012 School Budget for the Fiscal Year July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2013 137 2011 -2012 READING SCHOOL COMMITTEE Charles R. Robinson, Chair Karen Janowski, Vice Chair Harold Croft ADMINISTRATION CENTRAL OFFICE Lisa Gibbs David Michaud Chris Caruso ,John F. Doherty, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools Patricia deGaravilla Assistant Superintendent Mary C. DeLai Director of Finance & Operations Alison Elmer Director of Student Services Elizabeth Conway Human Resources Administrator SCHOOLS & DEPARTMENTS Elinor Freedman Principal, Reading Memorial High School Craig Martin Principal, Coolidge Middle School Doug Lyons Principal, Parker Middle School Karen Callan Principal, Barrows Elementary School Eric Sprung Principal, Birch Meadow Elementary School Karen Feeney Principal, Joshua Eaton Elementary School Catherine Giles Principal, J.W. Killam Elementary School Richard Davidson Principal, Wood End Elementary School Philip Vaccaro Director of Athletics & Extracurricular Activities Joseph P. Huggins Director of Facilities Lynn Dunn Director of Nursing Kristin Morello Director of Food Services Jesenia Castro METCO Director 138 FY13 Budget Calendar Town Meeting Warrant Closes September 27 School and district improvement plans submitted and presented to School Committee for review and approval October 15 Budget Preparation information sent to all administrators and MUMS budget training Mid - October Principals present improvement goals and corresponding budgetary needs October 1 -31 Financial Forum I to discuss revenue and initial accommodated cost assumptions October 12 Fee schedules reviewed by School Committee October 17 Building/department budget requests submitted to Central Office November 10 Town Meeting November 14 Superintendent Reviews building/department requests and performance goals .November Finalize FY13 Salary Projections Mid - November Superintendent holds community forums to discuss budget priorities Mid — Late November Budget Parent meetings Mid — Late November Budget development deliberations undertaken by Administration Late November Superintendent's Budget Finalized December 27 Budget document distributed December 30 School Committee questions submitted in preparation for deliberations January 3 Budget overview presented to School Committee January 5 Budget (cost center) presentations and deliberations by School Committee January 9, 19, 23 Financial Forum 11 January 25 Open Public Hearing on Budget January 23 School Committee vote on Superintendent's Budget January 30 School Committee Budget forwarded to Finance Committee and Town Manager February 6 School Committee meets with Finance Committee March 21 School Budget voted at Annual Town Meeting April 23 or 26 139 Table of Contents Section Pape 1.0 District Mission, Vision, and Goals I 1.1 Mission Statement 1 1.2 Vision Statement 1 1.3 District Goals and Reading Public Schools Strategy 3 for Improvement of Student Outcomes 2.0 District Data and Performance Measures 7 2.1 District Enrollment and Staffing 7 2.2 District Demographic and Student Performance Data 10 2.3 School Enrollment and Staffing 12 2.4 School Demographic and Performance Data 14 3.0 Executive Summary 18 3.1 School Committee's Budget Message 18 3.2 Budget Process Overview 20 3.3 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Summary 21 4.0 Cost Center Budgets 25 4.1 Administration 25 4.2 Regular Day 33 4.3 Special Education 41 4.4 . Other Programs 46 4.5 School Building Maintenance 55 4.6 Town Building Maintenance 59 5.0 District Revenues 62 5.1 Federal and State Grants 62 5.2 Special Revenue Funds 64 Appendix A: Tuition and Fee Schedules 66 Appendix B: School Committee Finance & Budget Policies 68 Appendix C: Superintendent's Budget Message 73 Appendix D: Superintendent's Budget Questions & Responses 75 140 Index of Charts, Tables and Graphs Table Description Paee. 1.1 Reading Public Schools Straiegyfor Improvement of Student Outcomes 4 2.1 Historical and Projected Enrollment by Grade Level 7. 2.2 Enrollment Trends, 2000 -2015 8 2.3 Historical and Projected District Staffing Levels 9 24 Student Population: Reading Compared to State 10 2.5 Student Performance: Reading Compared to State 10 2.6 Percent of Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on 2011 Math MCAS 11 2.7 Percent of Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on 2011 ELA MCAS 11 2.8 Percent of Students Graduating - 12 2.9 Percent of Students Attending 4 -Year Colleges 12 2.10 Reading's Elementary School Enrollment Trends 13 2.11 Reading's Middle School Enrollment Trends 13 2.12 Reading Memorial High School Enrollment Trend 14 2.13 Teacher, Specialist, and Instructional Support Staffing 14 2.14 Student Demographic Data 15 2.15 MCAS Performance Data by School 16 2.16 MCAS Student Growth Percentiles by School 17 3.1 Fiscal Year 2013 General Fund Summary- Recommended Budget 21 3.2 Historical Spending Levels, FY2003- FY2013 22 3.3 Proportional Spending by Cost Center (FY09 -FY13) 22 3.4 _ FY13 Budget Allocations by Cost Center 23 4.1 FY13 District Administration Budget 28 4.2 District Administration Staffing 28 4.3 Per Pupil Expenditure on District Administration by Community 29 4.4 Per Pupil Expenditure- Business and Finance by Community 31 4.5 FY2013 Regular Day Budget 36 4.6 Professional Development Expenditure per Teach er- Comparison 41 4.7 Special Education Enrollment Data with Comparative Communities 42 4.8 Reading Special Education Enrollment Data 43 4.9 Number of Related Service Minutes /Month Required at Middle School 44 4.10 Number of Initial Evaluations and 3 Year Evaluations Conducted in District 44 4.11 FYI Special Education Budget Summary 46 4.12 Staffing Levels for Other Program Areas 47 4.13 FY13 Health Services Budget 48 4.14 RMHS Participation Level by Sport 49 4.15 FY13 Athletics Budget 51 4.16 FY13 Extracurricular Activities Budget 53 4.17 FY13 Networking and Technology Maintenance Budget 54 4.18 Students per Modern Computer, Comparison with Communities 55 4.19 FYI School Building Maintenance Budget 57 4.20 School Building Maintenance Staffing 58 4.11 Natural Gas Consumption per Square Foot- Schools 58 4.22 Electricity Consumption per Square Foot-Schools 59 4.23 Water Consumption per Square Foot - Schools 59 4.24 Town Building Maintenance Budget 60 4.25 Natural Gas Consumption per Square Foot -Town Buildings 61 4.26 Electricity Consumption per Square Foot -Town Buildings 62 4.27 Water Consumption per Square Foot -Town Buildings 62 5.1 Grant Fund. Historical Expenditures, Current Year Awards 63 5.2 Current and Projected Grant Funded Positions 64 5.3 Revolving Fund Status as of June 30, 2011 65 5.4 Use of Offsets and Revenue Projections for FY2013 66 AI - Program Tuitions and User Fees 67 A2 Facility Rentals Fee Schedule 2012 -13 68 141 1.0 District Mission, Vision, and Goals 1.1 Mission Statement The Reading Public Schools strives to ensure that all students will have common, challenging, meaningful, learning experiences in the academics, health and wellness, the arts, community service, co- curricular activities, and athletics. We will lead and manage our school community to reflect the values and culture of the Reading Community, and guide and support our students to develop the appropriate skills, strategies, creativity, and knowledge necessary to be productive, informed, independent citizens in a global society. 1.2 Vision Statement It is the vision of the Reading Public Schools to continue fulfilling the promise of our mission and, in so doing, to be a model of educational excellence in preparing students for the 21 st century. Thus, as we go on with our journey of continual improvement and look forward to the coming years, this is the school district that we envision for our children and that we shall faithfully endeavor to-give to them ... Curriculum, Instruction, Technology, and Assessment... Our district shall have a pre -K through 12 curriculum that is aligned, well - articulated, and based upon the essential standards and skills that our students need to be productive, informed, independent, contributing citizens in a democratic society. This research -based curriculum will be challenging for all students and focus on depth of learning, rather than breadth of coverage. Each grade level will have specific, age- appropriate, 21" century skills integrated into the curriculum, which will include: creativity and innovation skills, critical thinking and problem solving skills, communication and collaboration skills, information literacy, media literacy, and technological literacy. In addition, our curriculum will use real -world problems to afford students the opportunity to develop essential life and career skills, such as flexibility and adaptability, initiative, self - direction, productivity and accountability, cross - cultural skills, social skills, life -long learning, leadership and responsibility, and personal wellness. Students will have opportunities to engage in activities aimed at fostering a life -long love of reading and literature. Civics and global awareness will also be interwoven throughout our schools' curriculum, allowing students to develop an understanding of their own roles as members of local, state, national, and global societies. Instruction in all classes will be tailored to the diverse needs of students and focus on high levels of student engagement in the learning process. Teachers will use a variety of research -based instructional methods such as flexible grouping, hands -on inquiry-based learning, and differentiated instruction to make each lesson both engaging and challenging. In addition, technology will be thoroughly integrated as a tool for teaching and learning, allowing students to access and assess an ever - expanding volume of knowledge and giving them the opportunities to expand their boundaries of learning beyond the walls of the classroom. In this way, students at every grade level will be acquiring the technology skills necessary for the 21 st century, and they will be given opportunities to connect, collaborate, and network with others. For instance, students and teachers will use blogs, podcasts, wikis, video production, and future applications to create assignments that are connected to meaningful, real -world issues. All schools will be completely wireless, and all students (beginning in grade 6) will use personal technology devices, electronic portfolios, and district email addresses. Students will use technology as a tool for critical learning, communication, and collaboration —both inside and outside the classroom. Staff will use technology for instruction, communication, grading, and collaboration; and our school leaders and administrative staff will utilize technology to manage the financial, human resource, and facilities departments. 1�Pa�c 142 Data from both formal and informal assessments shall drive the instructional practices in our district. To gauge what students truly know, can do, and understand, a comprehensive system of student assessment will be used to afford students the opportunity to demonstrate what they have learned through such means as formative and summative assessments, online assessments, project -based assignments, and culminating exhibitions. Technology will also be used to track student progress and the district and schools will use standards -based evaluations, such as the New England Association of Schools and Colleges accreditation process and the Blue Ribbon Schools of Excellence Blueprint for Success to ensure continual reflection and improvement toward the highest standards of teaching, learning, and leadership. Leadership, Personnel, and Learning Environment... District and school leaders shall be student- centered, collaborative, and steadfastly committed to the mission and vision of the Reading Public Schools. The School Committee, together with district and school leaders, shall provide the necessary resources and support to accomplish our vision. District finances will be sufficient to properly fund school and district improvement efforts consistent with the vision. District and school leaders shall manage the district in a fiscally- responsible manner, keeping the community continually informed of financial needs. In addition, the district will continue to identify and secure alternative sources of funding to augment local financing. With this culture of teamwork to accomplish goals, we will demonstrate our commitment to shared leadership and collaboration with all members of our school community. The faculty and staff will be diverse and team- oriented, and will work collaboratively to promote the mission, vision, and goals of the Reading Public Schools. All personnel will be highly - skilled, student - centered, motivated, lifelong learners. We shall have a comprehensive human resource management system which emphasizes thoughtful hiring practices and encourages diversity, support for new teachers, meaningful professional development, and an evaluation process which fosters continuous professional growth. As a result, a culture will exist. where all school district personnel have the opportunity to feel supported, valued, and report high levels of job satisfaction. In our district, it shall also be of paramount importance that all members of our learning community feel safe and free from bullying, harassment and discrimination. Diversity shall be embraced and mutual caring, respect, and empathy will be present throughout the community. Each student's educational experience will be personalized by members of the school who will know the student well, who will understand the student's abilities and challenges, and who will assist the student in achieving both personal growth and academic success. Before - school programs, after- school programs, community education, online courses, and summer enrichment academies will provide for our students engaging opportunities to expand their learning. It will be clearly understood and valued by all that learning occurs beyond the walls of the classroom. The district's school buildings shall always be well maintained, clean, comfortable, and safe environments for learning. In addition, the buildings will be energy efficient. Each individual's commitment to energy and resource conservation will be strikingly evident. Our school buildings will be equipped to provide a 21 st century learning environment for our students, and they will also be well - utilized centers of community activities. Families and Community... Education will truly be the shared responsibility of both the schools and the community, with families playing active roles in the schools and being full partners in ensuring the success of their children. Respectful communication between the home and school will be welcomed, encouraged, and expected. Together, we shall all share the importance of holding students to 21Pal, e 143 high standards and expectations for both their academic achievement and their social and emotional development. In the interest of the entire Reading community, the school district and town government shall work cooperatively and collaboratively. To stay current in financial and educational policy issues, the school district will also maintain open lines of communication with both elected officials and educational leaders at the local, state, and national levels. In addition, the school district will maintain active partnerships with businesses, universities, and civic organizations. As educators and members of our community, we believe that implementing this vision is our ethical responsibility to the children of the Town of Reading. And in so doing, we shall truly be fulfilling the promise of our mission. 1.3 District Goals Over the last 18 months, the Superintendent of Schools has collected feedback from over 1,000 community members, parents, teachers and students about the quality of the Reading Public Schools. As part of that feedback, questions were asked regarding what areas in the Reading Public Schools were effective and what areas needed to be strengthened. As a result of this feedback, the Superintendent, along with members of the administrative council, developed the Reading Public Schools Strategy for Improvement of Student Outcomes. This strategy, located below, is the blueprint for the district improvement plan for the next three years and focuses on four key strategic objectives on how to continue to improve our school district. These areas are as follows: I. Learning and Teaching • Deepen and refine our focus on the instructional core to meet the academic, social, and emotional needs of each child. II. Performance Management • Build a system that measures school performance and differentiates support based on need and growth. III. Investment and Development • Realign our resources to compete for, support, and retain top talent while creating leadership opportunities and building capacity within our staff. N. Resource Allocation Realign human and financial resources to address the strategic objectives. These strategic objectives and the initiatives that connect to each objective have become the compass for our district and drive the decisions that you will see in the FY13 budget. These are also the areas that are used for the development of each individual school improvement plan. Each school improvement plan contains SMART goals which will help move that school forward in areas that align with the above strategic objectives. SMART goals are defined as either student learning or professional practice goals that are specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, and timely. As part of the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education new Educator Evaluation System, each licensed educator in the district, including teacher, principal, and the Superintendent, developed at least two SMART goals for the 2011 -12 school year. The success of the actions implemented to accomplish the various goals could be objectively measured using relevant data available to the district and the schools. These goals are aligned with the strategic objectives outlined above and each school's improvement plan. 31Pagc 144 Table 1.1- Reading Public Schools Strategy for improvement of Student Outcomes Theory of Action If the Reading Public School District supports high quality teaching through the alignment of the academic, social, and emotional needs of our students, the hiring and support of effective staff, a measurement of school performance and differentiated support, and a realignment of human and financial resources, then-students will make effective progress and be appropriately challenged, graduating from high school ready for college, career, and life as contributing citizens in a global society. Strategic Objectives Learning and Teaching' Performance Investment and `' Resource Deepenandrefneourfocuson` "- Management -'- Development -: Allocation the instructional core to meet the .' Build a system that Realignouiresources to Realign human and financial academic, social, and emotional measures school compete for, support, and resources to address needs of each child.. performance and retain top talent while strategic objectives . differentiates support creating leadership based on need and opportunities and building - 1 9 rowth. I 'capacity within ourstaR Strategic Initiatives: 201V12 and 2012113 School Years ,Develop and implement a ! Update current mission Provide opportunities and ` plan to address tFe social and and vision to reflect incentives 'far staff to Connect expenses with emotional needs of all addressing the needs improve their teaching projected student students of the whole child and .and'leadership skills (i,e. outcomes outlined in the the behavioral health NISL, NBCT;IELL, Tech school and district improvement plans of our students ;;r-.. Prof) Examine all programs on Pilot the useof 1 on 1 a regular basis to leammg devices and Bring, , ii Your Own Device (BYOD) in Pilot, then implement Develop and implement a determine how they align with goals and the classroom Elementary Standards- recognitiomprogram restructure, if necessary, Based Report Card for all staff with a goal of maintaining a r adequate class sizes in the school district Implement high ,school best ' practices which include a ", Develop and make use Work with the Reading ,redesigned freshman year, of a set of School Develop highly Education Foundation to ,senior ects; ro ect- based P 1 P 1 _ Committee Norms functioning leadership maximize resources so learnm g, a redefined . for Self- Assessment teams throughout the that they become the ,schedule and implementation,_ of MASS Core for Leadership and district Research and graduation g School Improvement Development arm of the requirements Reading Public Schools 4111 145 Strategic Initiatives: 2011112 and 2012113 School Years (continued) rLearnina:and Performance Investment and. Resource Development .. school districtlines to Develop and implement a for all staff ' minimize ora 'oid split P long range plan to address Review and update Update curriculum maps the integration, g Teacher Assessment Process and Administrative Develop and implement to include common core, technology, and skills" maintenance, support. pp replenishment and P Evaluation Process in a 3 to 5 year financial improvement plan program transition issues progression of relatibri to new state aeachers and students'' Develop and im lementa P P instructional technology guidelines Differentiate mstruction, for METCO program including Develop and implement all; students which' includeS the Develop and implement a Provide professional ; a long range plan to address classroom and ;, mplementation of, set of K -12 guidelines for Edline implementation development in Universal Design Strategies program space issues, Universal Design host family support including making Killam Strategies" school progYainming ADA accessible Continue to'redefine school districtlines to for all staff ' minimize ora 'oid split P Review and implement Implement new substitute school assi nments and 9 school lunch nutrition teacher system " .;Identify additional learning special education guidelines process using SMART and planning time for program transition issues Redesign the'elementary . ° Goals, school and distract aeachers and students'' Develop and im lementa P P Review and improve the Review and revise: long range plan for ' - METCO program including employee e andln ie- school and ? P 9 P placement, transportation personnel policies and full da kinder arten ;', Y 9 academic support, and handbook ' host family support 51Pa�­e 146 for all staff ' Strategic Initiatives: 2012113 and 2013114 School Years - Implement adata- driven. htr performance assessment .;Identify additional learning process using SMART and planning time for Redesign the'elementary . ° Goals, school and distract aeachers and students'' schooLweeK' .• data teams, and graduate data k ,.Enhance;' Implementand ` develop sum'merand after i school progYainming Continue to'redefine special education programs and student support services 51Pa�­e 146 61(' �,c 147 2.0 District Data and Performance Measures 2.1 District Enrollment and Staffing Total student enrollment in Reading Public Schools has increased by 1.2% since the 2009 -10 school year, the first year of the economic downturn which has resulted in relatively stagnant school budgets. However, there has been significant growth in some grades, most notably at the middle school level. During the 2010 -11 school year, the sixth grade class increased by 9.6% and is the largest class to enter middle school in forty years. Enrollment overall is expected to grow moderately over the next several years due in part to the availability of additional housing in the community as well as demographic trends that are likely to increase the availability of housing for families with school age children. For the 2012 -13 academic year, we anticipate an additional 53 students to be enrolled in Reading Public Schools with those increases coming from the middle school and high school populations. The most significant future challenge will be the growth in high school enrollment over the next two years as the incoming classes are much larger than the outgoing classes during that time. This is likely to result in an increased need for course sections and therefore staffing in order to maintain appropriate class sizes. Additionally, the higher enrollment is also likely to result in the need for additional instructional equipment (such as classroom fumiture) and instructional materials. Table 2.1- Historical and Projected Enrollment by Grade Level The chart below depicts the long term trends in enrollment growth and shows the anticipated shift from middle school to high school. 7 1 P a g c 148 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Kindergarten 342 308 321 300 337 282 325 324 324 280 348 319 330 322 333 325 Grade 304 368 336 362 331 369 316 345 343 345 308 362 339 351 342 354 Grade 307 307 354 344 341 328 375 318 358 349 351 315 362 339 351 342 Grade 356 306 310 350 345 343 328 388 318 363 349 356 315 362 339 351 Grade4 359 353 308 312 349 346 353 335 393 318 369 347 356 315 362 339 Grades 369 353 357 309 307 351 353 349 342 390 316 366 347 356 315 362 ElementaryTotal 2,037 1,995 1 ,986 1,977 2,010 2,019 2,050 2,059 2,078 2,045 2,041 2,065 2,049 2,045 2,042 2,073 Pe rcerrt Change -2.1% -0.5% -0.5% 1.7% 0.4% 1.5% 0.4% 0.9% .1.6% -0.2% 1.2% -0.8% -0.2% -0.1% 1.5% Grade 331 368 344 348 315 312 355 348 343 353 387 311 366 347 356 315 Grade? 339 328 362 336 350 313 320 364 347 341 353 390 311 366 347 356 Grade 357 337 320 360 340 344 317 321 362 344 343 349 39D 311 366 347 Middle Total 1,027 1,033 1,026 1,044 1,005 969 992 1,033 1,052 1,038 1,083 1,050 1,067 1,024 1,069 1,018 Perce M Change 0.6% -0.7% 1.8% -3.7% .3.6% 2.4% 4.1% 1.8% -1.3% 4.3% -3.0% 1.6% 4.0% 4.4% 4.8% Grade 309 328 303 277 327 315 315 305 292 334 324 312 349 390 311 366 Grade 10,. 321 305 325 298 272 327 314 319 304 298 327 327 312 349 390 311 Grade 11 272 303 292 328 308 281 331 323 319 298 301 326 327 312 349 390 Grade 12 246 273 302 273 304 299 263 312 307 312 294 297 326 327 312 349 High Total 1,148 1,209 1,222 1,176 1,211 1,222 1,223 1,259 1,222 1,242 1,246 1,262 1,314 1,378 1,362 1,416 Pe rcert Change 5.3% 1.1% -3.8% 3.0% 0.9% 0.1% 2.9% -2.9% 1.6% 0.3% 1.3% 4.1% 4.9% -1.2% 4.0% District Total, 4,212 4,237 4,234 4,197 4,226 4,210 4,265. 4,351 4,352 4,325 4,370 4,377 4,430 4,047 4/173 4,507 Percem Charige 0.6% -0.1% -0.9% 0.7% -0.4% 1.3% 2.0% 0.0% -0.6% 1.0% 0.2% 1.2% 0.4% 0.6% 0.8% The chart below depicts the long term trends in enrollment growth and shows the anticipated shift from middle school to high school. 7 1 P a g c 148 Table 2.2- Enrollment Trends, 2000 — 2015 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 Off' O'5 Oa O� OHO 01 O� R° S0 1ti SII 'ti" 1a by ,t0 ,10 .10 ,ti0 .t0 ,10 .t0 ,y0 .t0 .t0 .t0 ,10 ,10 ,10 ,10 .t0 la Elementary d Middle ® High While enrollment has increased over the last several years, staffing levels remain significantly below the level of staffing that the district employed during the 2008 -09 school year prior to the reductions required by stagnant budgets. During the last school year, we employed the fewest number of staff in the district since 2003 -04 school year. On a per pupil basis, staffing has been at a less favorable ratio than in over a decade for both last year and the current school year with 8.5 pupils per school staff member. Even with the proposed addition of 13.6 FTE staff to the Fiscal Year 2013 budget, the enrollment staffing on a per pupil basis will be just slightly less at 8.3 pupil per school staff member. This is due to the increase in student enrollment. With staffing levels remaining stagnant while enrollment has grown, the result has been an increase in class size throughout the district. The average class size in the early elementary grades is 21 students while the upper elementary grades are averaging 22 students per class. The middle school has seen the most significant increases with class sizes at the seventh grade in both schools at 27 and 28 students per class. In addition, the high school has many course sections with 30 or more students in the classroom. With the approval of the Reading School Committee, the school administration continues to take proactive steps to minimize increases and balance class sizes at the elementary school through new school assignment guidelines developed in 2010. These guidelines provide the Superintendent more flexibility to assign students who are new to Reading Public Schools to a school outside of their assigned district as long as the school is within two miles of the child's home. These measures have helped to balance class sizes at the elementary level across the district. 81Pagc 149 Table 2.3- Historical and Projected District Staffing Levels ct Leadership nistrators nistrative Support Staff chvide Academic Leadership Services Administrators nistrative Support Staff it Building Leadership pals & Assistant Principals ruck Department Heads al Support Staff uctional Specialists hers & Specialists, Regular Education sroom Teachers, Special Education ialists, Regular Education' ialists, Special Education ical & Therapeutic Services rry/Media Specialists Instructors educators, Regular Education educators, Special Education lance, Counseling and Testing lance Department Head lance Counselors ical Support g Director Nurses I Support Clerical Support Extracurricular Activities Coordinator School Building Maintenance Directors & Managers Clerical Support Networking & Telecommunications Technology Maintenance DisMct Total 2008 -09 1 2009 -10 1 2010-11 1201142 1 201243 1 + 3.33 4.33 4.33 4.33 433 - 5.50 4.50 4.50 5.00 5.00 - 150 91Pa e, 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.20 12.00 - - 4.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.70 2.70 - 20.00 11.50 11.50 10.00 10.00 10.00 150 91Pa e, 0.70 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 - 0.50 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 - 20.00 11.50 11.50 10.00 10.00 10.00 - 1.00 1.70 1.70 1.70 2.20 2.20 - 0.67 0.67 0.67 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 - 1.50 251.70 246.70 244.70 245.70 249.30 3.60 11.60 13.20 13.20 13.20 13.60 0.40 7.50 7.50 7.50 8.00 8.00 - 25.20 25.20 25.20 26.70 26.70 - 14.00 15.40 15.40 16.90 17.50 0.60 7.90 7.90 7.90 7.90 7.90 - 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.00 1.00 - 39.90 26.20 24.50 24.50 27.50 3.00 80.00 73.00 7130 74.00 76,00 2,00 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 - 4.60 4.60 4.60 4.60 4.60 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - 10.60 10.50 10.50 1150 14.00 2.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 - 0.50 050 0.50 0.50 0.50 - 150 91Pa e, 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 - 2.00 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 - 150 91Pa e, 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 1 0.30 - 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 - 300 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 - 20.00 20.00 19.00 18.50 ]8.50 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 - 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 5 1.50 536.90 518.10 511.20 517.50 531.10 13.60 150 91Pa e, 2.2 District Demographic and Student Performance Data Reading Public Schools prides itself on along history of educational excellence not just in the core academic subjects but also in the performing arts, athletics, and extracurricular enrichment activities. Student achievement, as measured by several indicators, is high relative to the state and other comparable districts in the Commonwealth. The data below depicts our student population and achievement trends and shows how our students compare to the state as well as to similar districts in the Massachusetts. Table 2.4- Student Population: Reading Compared to State School Year %of School -Aged Children Enrolled %Receiving Special Education Services %Low Income %ELL %Minority %Kindergarten Students In Full -Day K Reading State Reading State Reading State Reading State Reading State Reading State 2005 -06 93 90 16.0 16.4 2.5 28.2 2.3 19.6 7.8 27.6 33 61 2006 -07 93 91 16.1 16.7 3.0 28.9 2.0 20.5 7.9 28.5 33 66 2007 -08 94 90 16.8 16.9 3.6 29.5 2.3 20.9 7.9 29.2 38 70 2008 -09 94 91 17.2. 17.1 3.9 30.7 2.1 21.3 8.2 30.1 37 75 2009 -10 94 91 17.0 17.0 4.6 32.9 2.3 21.8 8.3 30.9 ' 44 78 2010 -11 N/A N/A 16.3 17.0 5.2 34.2 1.7 23.4 8.2 31.8 42 80 Reading currently enrolls 94% of its school -aged children in its public schools which is above the state average of 91 %. Only 6% of children in Reading are enrolled in non - public schools. With respect to the number of children receiving special education services, our district percentage is slightly below the state average, a trend that began with the 2008 -09 school year. Reading has a much lower percentage of low income, English language learners, and minority students than the state average. Our numbers for each of these demographics are among the lowest statewide. Reading enrolls far fewer of its kindergarten students in full day kindergarten than the state average. This is likely due to the fact that Reading's full day kindergarten is a fee -based program. It is a long term goal of the Reading Public Schools to provide free full day kindergarten as future financial resources and space permit. Table 2.5- Student Performance: Reading Compared to State As the data above indicate, performance by Reading students exceeds statewide averages for all of the major indicators of student achievement. The percentage of students scoring proficient or above on the MCAS assessment is higher than the state average. Graduation rates and attendance rates are 20% and 17% above the state average, and the dropout rate is less than a quarter of what it is statewide. While our 101Pare 151 %Proficient or %Proficient or Attendance %of Students above in Math above in ELA %Graduating Dropout Rate I% of students absent Enrolled in 1 or Year MCAS MCAS fewer than 10 days) more AP Courses (all grades) (all grades) Reading State Reading State Reading State Reading State Reading State Reading State 2005 -06 69 47 82 63 0.7 3.8 81 66 10 17 2006 -07 74 53 84 66 95.5 79.9 0.4 3.3 80 67 7 18 2007 -08 72 55 80 65 89.6 80.9 3.0 3.8 79 67 16 19 2008 -09 76 56 81 67 94.2 81.2 0.4 3.4 79 68 17 20 2009 -10 75 58 83 68 93.7 81.5 0.9 2.9 78 67 21 23 2010 -11 76 58 83 69 94.5 82.1 0.5 2.9 77 66 23 23 As the data above indicate, performance by Reading students exceeds statewide averages for all of the major indicators of student achievement. The percentage of students scoring proficient or above on the MCAS assessment is higher than the state average. Graduation rates and attendance rates are 20% and 17% above the state average, and the dropout rate is less than a quarter of what it is statewide. While our 101Pare 151 attendance rates are better than the state average, the downward trend is of concern and appears to be a further indicator of the need for the additional counseling and behavioral supports that are being requested in the FY2013 budget. More of our juniors and seniors are enrolled in AP courses than the state average — a position that just changed for the first time last year. Reading students also outperform many of the districts who are comparable to Reading as measured by student demographic profiles and community wealth. As the charts below indicate, Reading is among the top three or four districts in most indicators of student success as compared to similar districts in Massachusetts. Table 2.6- Percent of Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on 2011 Mathematics MCAS (all grades) Table 2.7- Percent of Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced in 2011 ELA MCAS (all grades) ._...... ........ _. 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 �e\10 c� oo �o�a Oace�5 oSZ P�aoet Peaa`oo. �J6 e\a oe �o 152 II1P;i,,e 80 --- - ------ ------ -- ....__..- - - -- --- _._._._.. ._...- - -- 75 70 65 M7� __ — - - - - — 60 - — 55 --- - -- - - -- --- 511 _--1—'— , 0e\�oc` J\c�`oe e����o`a OaceAe �e\`oye Pcaoet Q'eea`c� �orJ`c �o Table 2.7- Percent of Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced in 2011 ELA MCAS (all grades) ._...... ........ _. 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 �e\10 c� oo �o�a Oace�5 oSZ P�aoet Peaa`oo. �J6 e\a oe �o 152 II1P;i,,e Table 2.8- Percent of Students Graduating 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 Oe� 4c` 0c ek6 e e e �,ES � \6 10 ` ° ° rJ ��•c � °° , k\ � ea l J J�c �o Table 2.9- Percent of Students Attending 4-Year Colleges 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 " °�a aces e\`o5e a °rr aa�G s° �� ot� e�\e�a c�`oc ee� °000 �e�� �a� �\ Sl`cC:� � 2.3 School Enrollment and Staffing At the elementary level, the redistricting plan of six years ago has resulted in more balanced enrollment across all five elementary schools. There is a minimal variation in grade level enrollment across the five elementary schools and that variation is generally between 5 -10 students. Any exceptions are due to isolated pockets of high enrollment at a particular school. With the School Committee's support of spot redistricting for students entering elementary schools, grade level enrollments should continue to be more balanced across the schools. 12111agc. 153 Table 2.10- Reading's Elementary School Enrollment Trends Middle school enrollment continues to fluctuate with an overall trend toward higher numbers. There is a continued effort to balance class sizes between the middle schools. Parker Middle School enrollment is over 118 students higher than the Coolidge Middle School enrollment. One area that will be reviewed in the future is the current middle school district alignment where two elementary schools (Birch Meadow and Killam) are split schools for enrollment. Table 2.11- Reading's Middle School Enrollment Trends The enrollment at Reading Memorial High School has also been increasing steadily over the last several years. Given the increased "enrollments at the middle schools, this trend is expected to continue of the next few years. Currently, over 87% of grade 8 students continue on to attend Reading Memorial High School. 1311'agc 154 Table 2.12- Reading Memorial High School Enrollment Trend The enrollment of the RISE preschool program is 100 students and continues to grow. This current school year, a RISE classroom was added to Wood End to accommodate growing enrollment needs. The table below shows instructional, therapeutic, and support staffing in each of our schools. As the data indicate, the ratio of students to instructional and support staff in our schools ranges from a low of 5.9 to a high of 12.3. Those schools with a lower student to staff ratio are those that have a higher number of special education students and programs in the school. As you can see, in those schools, the number of special education teachers and paraeducators is higher as a percentage of total staffing. The average across the district is 9.8 students per instructional and support staff. Table 2.13- Teacher, Specialist and Instructional Support Staffing 2.4 School Demographic and Performance Data The chart below compares the distribution of three categories of student demographic data, namely, the percentage of children designated as low income, limited English proficiency, and receiving special education services. As the data indicates, the percentage of children who have limited English 14111agc 155 Birch Joshua Wood Staffing Category Barrows Meadow Eaton Killam End Coolidge Parker RMnS RISE Regular Ed Teachers &Specialists 20.3 22.5 24 25.7 213 31.7 40.5 74 0 Special Ed Teachers &Specialists 9.1 4 3 .5 4 9 8.5 11 6.1 Therapeutic Service Providers 2.1 1.4 1.2 1.5 1.7 1 1 1 3.8 Psychologists & Guidance Counselors 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 6.1 0 Classroom Tutors 1.4 .2.1 2 119 2.1 1 0 0 0 Regular Ed Paraprofessionals 2.8 3.1 3.5 3.3 2.7 1 1 1 0 Special Ed Paraprofessionals 11.4 3.9 3 4.6 8 9 8.1 9.8 7.1 Total Professional &Support Staff 48.1 37.95 37.7 1 43 1 42.8 1 55.7 1 61.1 102.9 1 17 School Enrollment 389 412 446 451 367 466 584 1262 100 Student to Staff Ratio 8.1 10.9 11.8 1015 8.6 8.4 9.6 12.3 5.9 2.4 School Demographic and Performance Data The chart below compares the distribution of three categories of student demographic data, namely, the percentage of children designated as low income, limited English proficiency, and receiving special education services. As the data indicates, the percentage of children who have limited English 14111agc 155 proficiency is very low across all schools. The Killam Elementary School has the highest percentage at 4.7 %. The data also indicates that the percentage of low income students is well below 5% at most of our schools. Currently, the Killam Elementary School is the only school in the district that receives Title I funding that is specifically designated for schools with higher poverty rates. Special education percentages are higher at the middle and high schools as a result of the combined populations that are entering from earlier grade levels. With respect to the elementary schools, one can see that the Wood End Elementary School and the Barrows Elementary School have the highest percentage of students receiving special education services with Joshua Eaton having the lowest percentage. Table 2.14 - Student Demographic Data 20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 0.0 Barrows Birch Joshua Killam Wood Coolidge Parker RMHS Meadow Eaton End ® `% Low Income ■ %Special Education a2 % Limited English Proficiency As was discussed above, Reading Public Schools have always compared favorably to the state and comparable districts with respect to the performance on the state MCAS assessment. As expected, there is variation among the schools in our district. The high school has consistently maintained very high rates of achievement as measured by MCAS performance. Last year, 93% of students at RMHS scored Advanced or Proficient on the Mathematics and 94% for ELA MCAS. In addition, 96% at the middle schools scored Advanced or Proficient on the ELA MCAS. With respect to the Mathematics MCAS, 89% of students scored at the Advanced or Proficient level. The elementary school results show that on the ELA MCAS, 90% of students scored Advanced or Proficient. With respect to the Mathematics MCAS, 89% of students scored Advanced or Proficient. 151Page 156 Table 2.15 -MCAS Performance Data: Percent of Students in Advanced or Proficient 100 90 80 70 60 50 Barrows Birch Joshua Killam Wood Coolidge Parker RMHS Meadow Eaton End 0 %Advanced or Proficient in ELA MCAS ♦ % Advanced or Proficient in Math MCAS Reading Public Schools has several schools that did not achieve AYP (Adequate, Yearly Progress) in Mathematics, English Language Arts, or both in a specific subgroup of students as well as in the aggregate of all students in the school. These schools will review the data on specific students as well as complete an item analysis to support students with areas of lower achievement. It should be noted that in 2011 over 81% of schools and 90% of districts in the state did not achieve AYP due to the increase in student proficiency level targets as defined by the No Child Left Behind legislation. The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) has submitted a request for a waiver for flexibility from the NCLB regulations that will allow the state and the DESE the ability to take a more comprehensive approach to monitoring student learning and supporting all schools and districts with improvement strategies, instructional practices, and professional development. The DESE also releases another measurement of student progress known as the Student Growth Percentile (SGP). This indicator tracks individual student growth from year to year MCAS results through a comparison of all other students in Massachusetts with the same score. These scores are reported by individual students, classes, grade level, and schools. Our district uses this information as another measure of student progress as well as a way to share best practices between teachers and schools. The charts below show the Student Growth Profile for each school in both ELA and Mathematics. Growth scores in the 1 -39 range indicate low growth, scores in the 40 -60_ range indicate moderate growth, and scores in the 61 -99 range indicate higher growth. These scores have provided more information on areas where we need to focus for both curriculum and professional development. Particular areas of concern are math at the middle and high school levels and ELA at the elementary level which includes writing. Students scored low on open response questions in both ELA and Math with some grades scoring below the state average. 161Pagc 157 Table 2.16 -ELA and Math Student Growth Percentiles, 2010 -11 90 80 70 50 50 40 30 20 10 0 Barrows Birch Meadow ELA SGP ® Math SGP 158 17111a�,e 3.0 Executive Summary 3.1 School Committee's Budget Message The Reading Public Schools, with the support of the Reading School Committee, has continued its tradition and mission of preparing all'studehts to be successful and productive members of a global society. We are committed to providing quality, meaningful educational experiences for all students. We are grateful for the working relationship the Committee and Administration shares with the other town boards including the Board of Selectman and the Finance Committee. The previous few fiscal years had us in the midst of a global economic crisis which had a direct effect on revenues that help fund town governments and school departments across this country and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Although we have not seen the end of the economic crisis, the Town of Reading, due to prudent financial planning, is in the fortunate position to utilize reserves in order to balance our fiscal year 2013 budget as the School Department could no longer sustain reductions in personnel or supplies and expect to maintain a high quality school district that focuses on continuous improvement and innovation. Additionally, as noted in the Superintendent's Recommended Budget, we are at a point where our budget needs to address several areas that have been adversely impacting our students with behavioral health being the most critical. This budget also addresses the transition of all of our curriculum areas to the Common Core of Learning which is the newly approved Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks. And, common assessments need to be developed in all subject areas and grade levels as part of the new Massachusetts Educator Evaluation system. The Reading School Committee remains committed to its Budget Planning Policy which states, "The first priority in the development of an annual budget will be the educational welfare of the children in our schools." In keeping with the School Committee Policies, the best interest of the students guided our deliberations. The guidance given at the October 2011 Financial Forum was an increase of 2% over Fiscal Year 2012 Town Meeting adopted budgets. The School Committee voted budget for Fiscal Year 2013 represents a 2.9% increase over Fiscal Year 2012 or nine tenths of a percent higher than the guidance. It should be noted that this budget addresses the same priorities and amounts recommended by the Superintendent in his budget released in late December. In terms of dollars this is an additional $1,047,980. Although this increase is above the 2 %, we feel it would have been disingenuous to approve anything less due to the previously mentioned critical needs and mandates. This increase is not taken lightly and a significant amount of dialogue took place over several evenings with members of the public and Finance Committee present before our final vote on January 30, 2012. The Reading School Committee is grateful to the School Administration for all of its efforts in what is always a challenging budget process. We appreciate the thoughtful dialogue and engaged participation of administrators, school department employees, parents, and community members. We are also grateful for the collaborative efforts and strong relationships between school and town elected and appointed officials, and management staff. 3.2 Budget Process Overview The budget process begins in the late summer and early fall as administrators and department heads review and update their goals and priorities for their schools. These goals are translated into action plans which outline the resources necessary to accomplish those goals and objectives with the major categories of resources being time, money, and staff. 1811'nge 159 While the goals and objectives of the schools and the district drive the decisions regarding the allocation of resources, the town and the school department must first work together to project the total amount of available revenue to support the budget requests. That process begins with a series of Financial Forums, where the Finance Committee, the Board of Selectman, and the School Committee meet to review revenue for the upcoming fiscal year as well as the "accommodated" costs which are those costs that are, in essence, fixed and, by agreement, are shared by all town and school departments. These include expenses such as health insurance, trash removal, and energy and utilities. At the September and October Financial Forums, community brainstorming sessions on revenue generation ideas and expense reduction ideas also occurred. Once the available revenue has been established, the projected accommodated costs are subtracted and the remaining available revenue is allocated to the school department and town departments based on the historical proportion, approximately 66% to the school department and 34% to the town departments. This projected available funding amount provides a guideline to the departments as they develop their individual budgets. The school department's budget process begins with the development of the Superintendent's recommended budget. In accordance with Massachusetts law and school committee policy, this budget reflects what is necessary to provide an adequate education to the students of Reading Public Schools given available resources. There is also a minimum district funding requirement established by the state known as the required net school spending. Historically, Reading has always spent above its minimum requirement, although, the gap between actual spending and minimum spending is beginning to erode. The Superintendent's budget is presented to the School Committee in January. At that time, the School Committee discusses the Superintendent's funding recommendations. It is the School Committee's responsibility to put forth the budget it feels is necessary to provide an adequate education to the students of Reading. Once any requested changes are made to the budget, the School Committee votes on the funding request to the town. That funding request, known as the School Committee Budget, is then submitted to the Town Manager. The Town Manager incorporates -the School Department budget into the larger Town Budget, making any changes necessary to ensure the total budget is balanced. This budget is submitted to the Finance Committee which serves as the advisory board to Town Meeting; it is theirjob to provide guidance on financial matters to Town Meeting members. The budget is presented to Town Meeting at the Annual Town Meeting in April at which time Town Meeting votes on the total amount to be appropriated for the school department. 3.3 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Summary The table below summarizes Superintendent's Requested Budget for Fiscal Year 2013. The budget request represents a 2.9% increase, an additional $1,047,980 over the Fiscal Year 2012 approved budget. The major drivers of this requested increase include: • additional staffing to address the priorities outlined above in the Superintendent's budget message; • the shifting of a little over $400,000 in salaries from the Federal Education Jobs grant back to the operating budget; • additional funding to address curriculum and professional development needs related to several federal and state mandates such as common core implementation, teacher evaluation, and bullying prevention as well as areas where student outcomes are lagging; 191 Page 160 • the restoration of prior year deep cuts to instructional material and supply budgets at the building level; and, • partial restoration of cuts made to elementary paraeducators necessary to ensure adequate instructional and behavioral supports for children. The requested increases are offset by the increased use of revolving fund revenues and additional energy savings due in large part to the negotiation of very favorable three year contract for natural gas with - significantly lower pricing than the prior three year contract. Table 3.1- Fiscal Year 2013 General Fund Summary: Superintendent's Recommended Budget The charts below illustrate historical spending levels for the district as well as spending for each cost center historically and for the current proposed budget. 201Pagc 161 School Actual Actual Actual Current Committee Expended Expended Expended Budget Budget % FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Change Administration 868,632 805,116 834,689 852,039 905,868 63% Regular Day 20,112,472 19,627,660 21,047,381 21,587,524 22,188,163 2.8% Special Education 8,837,120 9,053,779 9,370,875 9,186,325 9,458,989 3.0% Other Programs 1,413,196 1,223,149 1,290,899 1,180,308 1,304,270 10.5% Subtotal 31,231,420 30,709,705 32,543,844 32,806,197 33,857,289 3.2% School Bldg Maintenance 3,676,030 3,297,590 3,110,588 3,199,110 3,195,998 -0.1% Total 34,907,450 34,007,294 35,654,432 36,005,307 37,053,287 2.9% Accommodated Costs: Tuition 2,450,980 2,879,309 3,048,520 3,832,067 3,680,235 -4.09/o Circuit Breaker - - - (1,102,000) (1,290,000) 17.1% Transportation 908,750 861,046 921,095 893,000 954,000 6.8% Utilities 739,805 635,187 616,958 761,730 708,760 -7.09/o Natural Gas 534,842 487,224 478,367 467,115 456,358 -2.3% Total Accommodated 4,634,375 4,862,765 5,064,941 4,851,912 4,509,353 -7.1% Total Non- Accommodatec 30,273,075 29,144,529 30,589,491 31,153,395 32,543,934 4.59/o The charts below illustrate historical spending levels for the district as well as spending for each cost center historically and for the current proposed budget. 201Pagc 161 Table 3.2- Historical Spending Levels, FY2003 — FY2013 Table 3.3- Proportional Spending by Cost Center, FY09— FY13 60.0% 50.0% �. 400% N� 30.0% r 10.0%. 0.0' FY09 FY10 FYll FY12 FY13 ■Administration 2.5% 2.3% 2.3% 2.4% 2.4% Regular Day 58.0% 58.8% 59.1% 60.0% 59.9% Special Education 24.996 25.6% 25.4% 25.5% 25.5% o Other Programs 4.0% 3.2% 3.4% • 3.3% 3.5% ■ School Facilities 10.6% 10.1% 9.8% 8.9% 8.6% - -- 211Pa--c 162 Table 3.4 -FY13 Budget Allocation by Cost Center The following sections highlight the major changes to each of the five cost centers that comprise the School Department budget. Section 4.0 of this budget document provides detailed discussions of each of the various cost center budgets. Administration The proposed increase to the Administration budget is 6.3% which represents an increase of $53,829. Of this increased amount, $17,000 relates to a change that was made this year but was not reflected in the original FY12 budget. In the summer of 2011, the school department implemented a change from contracted substitute teacher services to in -house substitute teachers. The change required an additional $17,000 in staffing expense in the human resources and payroll departments and $10,000 for the licensing fees for the web -based substitute management software system. The funds will be transferred from the Regular Day budget and these expenses are more than offset by the savings from the change. In fact, the net savings from this change is projected to be over $25,000. The remainder of the increase is attributable to salary increases and contractual benefits for Central Office administrators and administrative support staff, replenishment of supply inventories due to very little spending in this area over the past three years, increased expense related to color copier and printer supplies, and increased postage expenses due to the postal rate increase and the use of shipping vendors in place of the district's courier since that position has been reduced to part-time. Regular Day The requested Regular Day budget increases by Z.8% over the FY2012 School Committee budget which represents an increase of $600,639. Nearly 80% of this increase is attributable to salary expenses for existing or new staff. The new staffing is to address the priorities discussed above in the Superintendent's Budget Message. This includes 1.0 FTE middle school teacher for a new health education class and 1.6 FTE high school teachers for health education classes. There is also an additional 1.0 FTE teacher that will be used to offer academic content instruction to students in a new special education program at the high school. With respect to increases for existing staff, $98,000 of this additional expense is due to the expiration of the federal Education Jobs grant as salaries charged to the grant in FY2012 must now be absorbed within the regular day budget. Teacher salary increases (column 22111 agc 163 School Other Facilities, 8.6% 2.4% Programs, 3.5% pkial tt �3 The following sections highlight the major changes to each of the five cost centers that comprise the School Department budget. Section 4.0 of this budget document provides detailed discussions of each of the various cost center budgets. Administration The proposed increase to the Administration budget is 6.3% which represents an increase of $53,829. Of this increased amount, $17,000 relates to a change that was made this year but was not reflected in the original FY12 budget. In the summer of 2011, the school department implemented a change from contracted substitute teacher services to in -house substitute teachers. The change required an additional $17,000 in staffing expense in the human resources and payroll departments and $10,000 for the licensing fees for the web -based substitute management software system. The funds will be transferred from the Regular Day budget and these expenses are more than offset by the savings from the change. In fact, the net savings from this change is projected to be over $25,000. The remainder of the increase is attributable to salary increases and contractual benefits for Central Office administrators and administrative support staff, replenishment of supply inventories due to very little spending in this area over the past three years, increased expense related to color copier and printer supplies, and increased postage expenses due to the postal rate increase and the use of shipping vendors in place of the district's courier since that position has been reduced to part-time. Regular Day The requested Regular Day budget increases by Z.8% over the FY2012 School Committee budget which represents an increase of $600,639. Nearly 80% of this increase is attributable to salary expenses for existing or new staff. The new staffing is to address the priorities discussed above in the Superintendent's Budget Message. This includes 1.0 FTE middle school teacher for a new health education class and 1.6 FTE high school teachers for health education classes. There is also an additional 1.0 FTE teacher that will be used to offer academic content instruction to students in a new special education program at the high school. With respect to increases for existing staff, $98,000 of this additional expense is due to the expiration of the federal Education Jobs grant as salaries charged to the grant in FY2012 must now be absorbed within the regular day budget. Teacher salary increases (column 22111 agc 163 movement and the payment of additional competency stipends negotiated as part of the current collective bargaining agreement) account for another approximately $97,000. The restoration of cuts to regular education paraeducators as well as their, contractual salary increases results in an increase ofjust over $50,000. In addition, average salary increases for building administrators are budgeted at 2.25% adds $28,000 to the FY 13 budget. There are also increases budgeted for instructional expenses as well, most notably, the restoration of $100,000 for building level expense budgets. Curriculum and professional development expenses have been increased by $120,000 in order to provide adequate funding for work that needs to be done to align our curriculum to the common core, develop common assessments to be used as part of the new teacher evaluation system, and provide bullying prevention training to staff. This additional amount also includes funding for curriculum materials for new health education classes at the middle and high school level. The FY2013 regular day requested budget also includes an increase of $80,000 to fund the replacement of our aging teacher computers, many of which are now six to seven years old. There is also an additional $42,000 of spending requests for content filtering software, Administrators Plus enhancements for the new elementary report cards, and for a data analysis tool that will replace Test Wiz and supplement our current data analysis and reporting tools. It is important to note that a portion of the increase is also offset by an increased reliance on the Kindergarten tuition revenue fund offset. The proposed level of support exceeds the anticipated revenue from FY2013 and, therefore, will result in a decrease in the fund balance by year's end. Special Education The FY2013 Special Education budget request is 3.0% higher than the FY2012 budget representing an increase of $272,664. The majority of this increase represents salary expenses for new or existing employees. The new staffing is to address priorities that were discussed above in the Superintendent's Budget Message. This includes 1.5 FTE increase for counseling staff to support students at the High School and Middle Schools, 1.0 FTE district wide psychologist to perform testing and evaluation for students thereby allowing our school psychologists to spend more time counseling students, an additional 0.4 FTE teacher for the Barrows DLC program, an additional 0.4 FTE speech pathologist to provide additional support at the High School, and an additional 0.2 FTE occupational therapist to provide services at the middle schools. We have also included an additional 2.0 FTE special education paraeducators for students who we anticipate will require additional services or supports during the course of the next school year. Currently, we are also funding $200,000 in special education paraeducator salaries from the federal Education Jobs grant and those salaries will need to be paid for from the special education budget next year. These salaries are partially offset by an increase in the revenue offsets from the special education and the RISE tuition revolving accounts. With respect to non -salary increases, there are a currently a number of special education cases that are in various stages of discussion, mediation, or litigation that we anticipate may result in out of district placements. While these potential placements result in additional tuitions, those additional tuitions are offset for the most part by tuition reductions due to students who are no longer in need of services because they have graduated or turned twenty -two years of age. While there is an increase overall to the out of district transportation budget, there is, in the net, a decrease in special education tuition. We are anticipating that the Special Education Reimbursement Grant will be funded at a level equating to a 65% reimbursement rate in FY2013. For the most part, while there are some fluctuations in individual expense lines, expenses as a whole remain relatively unchanged from FY2012. - Other Districtwide Programs This cost center includes the Health Services budget, the Athletics budget, the Extracurricular Activities budget, and the districtwide Networking and Technology Maintenance budget. Overall, the Other Districtwide Programs budget is projected to increase 10.5% representing an increase of $123,962. Thirty percent of this increase comes from the projected increase in the Athletics budget. This is partly 231Pngc 164 due to the fact that the FYI budget assumed $50,000 in coaching salaries to be paid from the Education Jobs grant. These salaries must now be shifted back to the operating budget. There are also fairly significant increases projected for equipment maintenance, facility rental expense, transportation, and officials due to contractual rate increases from service and facility providers. The increased expenses are partially offset by an increase in the use of revenues from the Athletics revolving fund. The amount used exceeds the anticipated receipts for the year and will, therefore, cause the fund balance to decline by - - years end. The largest increase to this cost center comes from the Networking and Technology Maintenance budget which increases 27.1% or $66,558. This increase comes from the requested addition of 1.5 FTE computer technicians due to the continued increase in the amount of technology across all of our schools. There are currently over 1,800 computers alone across our eight schools. With the implementation of a technology work order ticket, we now have data demonstrating that the inadequacy of current staffing levels. This is discussed in. more detail below in the individual cost center budget overviews below. School Building Maintenance The School Building Maintenance budget for FY2013 is projected to decrease slightly by 0.1 % which equates to $3,100. We continue to experience and anticipate savings in natural gas, electricity, and water and sewer expenses. This is due to a modest decrease in consumption as we begin to realize the full benefit of performance contracting and with the installation of new windows at Birch Meadow and a new roof at Killam. In addition, with natural gas prices at historical lows, we are seeing price savings as well in these areas. Overall, we anticipate gas and utility expenses to decrease by just over $63,000 next year. Those decreases, however, are offset by several key anticipated increases. Several of our repair contracts are scheduled to expire next year and we are factoring a price escalator of 5% for most of those contracts due to increases in prevailing wage rates. In addition, we are budgeting additional funds in some building maintenance and repair lines to address maintenance that has been deferred for the last year or two. These changes are discussed in greater detail in Section 4.5 below. Town Building Maintenance The Town Building Maintenance Budget for FY2013 is projected to increase slightly by 0.6% reflecting an increase ofjust over $4,000. Overall, energy and utility expenses are anticipated to be $9,000 lower than FY2012 due to energy conservation measures and lower energy prices. This decrease, however, is more than offset by an anticipated increase in contract cleaning services. Our current cleaning services contract will expire this year. We have found that the current cleaning contract is significantly below market value and is posing a hardship for the current vendor. We believe that with the next procurement, we will see pricing more reflective of our prior contract and current market values. 241Pagc 165 4.0 Cost Center Budgets The budget of the Reading Public Schools is divided into five cost centers including: Administration, Regular Day, Special Education, Other Programs, and School Building Maintenance. In addition, there is a sixth cost center, Town Building Maintenance, since the School Department is responsible for the maintenance of both school and town buildings. Per the vote of the Reading School Committee, the budget is established by cost center and transfers between cost centers can only be made per the vote of -- the School Committee. Approval for transfers within cost centers is delegated to the administration. Each of the various cost centers is described in more detail in the sections that follow. Each section also includes information on staffing, performance indicators and benchmarks for the programs and activities funded in that cost center, current goals and priorities, funding needs and challenges for the 2013 fiscal year, and detailed budget history and projections for fiscal year 2013. 4.1 Administration The Administration cost center comprises the salaries and expenses of the Central Office administration which includes the following major functional areas: School Committee, Superintendent, Assistant Superintendent, Business and Finance, Human Resources, and District -wide Data and Information Management. The Administration cost center currently accounts for 2.4% of the total district budget. The largest expenditure in this cost center is for the salaries of the four district administrators (Superintendent, Assistant Superintendent, Director of Finance & Operations, Human Resources Administrator), a portion of the Network Administrator's salary representing his contribution to district data and information management, and the 5.0 FTE administrative support staff that are critical to the operations of the central office. The FY2013 Administration budget is projected to increase by 6.3% or $53,829. This increase is driven predominantly by the increase in staffing necessary to make the change this year from outsourced to in- sourced substitute management. Increases to salary and hours were necessary for the additional human resource and payroll administration effort that resulted from this change, which totaled a little over $17,000. In addition, the cost of the web -based software that is used for substitute management is a little over $10,000. While this change occurred in the current fiscal year, these expenses are not reflected in the current year's original budget. These expenses will be offset this year from savings in the regular day budget where the costs for substitute management had previously been charged. It is important to note that even though this change has increased the Administration budget, the overall impact to the budget was a net savings of over $25,000. The other increases in the salary line reflect budgeted salary increases of 2% to 2.25% for Administrators and Central Office support staff. In addition, the actual obligations for FY2012 are higher than what is budgeted as a result of final salary increases and adjustments for the current year. Other expenses attributed to this cost center include • Telephone and wireless service • Central office equipment leases (photocopiers, postage meter, etc.) • Legal, auditing, and grant- writing services • Printing, postage, and mailing expenses • Employee recruiting expenses (advertising, pre - employment physicals, etc.) • Dues, memberships, and attendance at professional association workshops • Miscellaneous office equipment and supplies 251Pa-e 166 As the figures below indicate, the largest expense line after salaries is for telecommunication services. This line includes the cost of all telephone and wireless services for the district (not including equipment repairs which are in the district -wide technology budget). This line shows a decrease for FY2013 with the amount being reflective of our actual experience over the past several years. Similarly, all other contract services lines are projected to be below FY2012 budget levels. The grant writing services projection is based on utilizing these services for two major grant applications during the course of the year.- The auditing expense is for the actual cost of the End of Year Report compliance audit. No additional auditing services are planned for FY2013. We anticipate a reduced need for labor counsel services this year since collective bargaining has been completed. In addition, the increased experience of our Administrators should reduce the reliance on these outside services. Supplies and materials are projected to increase significantly in percentage terms although the actual increase is just over $4,200. This increase results from the increased cost of copier and printer toner as well as paper. While we have been using less paper than prior years, we have seen and are anticipating an increase in paper costs next year. In addition, as can be seen in the table below, expenses over the last few years have been kept relatively low as we have relied on existing supply inventories. Those inventories are now being depleted and will need to be replenished. The increase in the FY2013 budget for other expenses is 8.3% or a little over $5,500. This is attributable to two areas primarily — professional development and software licenses. Professional development is increased to reflect additional training to central office administration and support staff that are new to their roles or have expanded into new areas and require additional training; this includes Superintendent's Induction program, training in procurement law, payroll administration, and MUNIS reporting. In addition, the budget fully funds contractual liabilities for tuition reimbursement expenses. The increase in the software licensing expense line reflects the new Aesop substitute management and placement platform. This is a web -based software system that allows teachers to report absences and for substitutes to select and be assigned to cover those absences. The cost of this software is a little over $10,000 per year. 26111agc 167 Table 4.1 -FY13 District Administration Budget The table below shows historic and project staffing for the District Administration cost center. Table 4.2- District Administration Staffing District Leadenhip 2007 -08 2008 -09 2009 -10 2010 -11 School 2012 -13 Actual Actual Actual Current Committee 4.33 4.33 Expended Expended Expended Budget Budget % 5.00 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Change Salaries - - - - 9.33 - - - -- - - - Profesional Salaries 422,895 439,876 488,288 492,836 509,966 3.5% Clerical Salaries 246,448 205,720 196,608 189,736. 220,187 16.0% Other Salaries 1,324 1,40D 5,600 5,600 - - 100.0.0 Subtotal - Salaries 670,667 646,996 690,496 688,172 730,153 6.1% Contract Services Telecommunications 59,007 52,407 49,293 62,079 56,172 -9.5% Consulting 5,092 750 - - - 0.0"/0 Auditing 8,000 15,000 8,000 8,500 8,000 -5.99/o Grant Writing 10,550 17,150 - 8,050 8,500 50o Labor Counse1 2,494, 4,296 15,006 6,000 5,250 -12.5% Subtotal - Services 85,142 89,603 72,299 84,629 77,922 - 7.9'.5 Supplies & Materials 28,923 7,290 3,262 7,749 11,957 54.3% Other Expenses Employee Benefits 8,943 8,166 8,100 10,800 9,000 -16.7% Professional Development 6,207 1,340 1,692 3,405 10,345 203.8% Equipment 17,978 16,613 18,010 10,880 9,123 -16.1% Recruiting & Hiring 30,229 24,969 22,029 29,475 27,893 -5.4% Software Licensing - - 4,875 .2,500 13,264 430.6% Postage 14,167 3,686 11,076 3,945 4,806 21.8% Awards 69 395 740 10D 925 825.0% Dues & Memberships 10,938 9,487 9,910 10,385 10,480 0.9% Subtotal - Other Expenses 88,531 64,655 76,430 .71,490 85,836 20.1% TOTAL ADMINISTRATION 873,262 808,544 842,487 852,039 9057868 6.3% The table below shows historic and project staffing for the District Administration cost center. Table 4.2- District Administration Staffing District Leadenhip 2007 -08 2008 -09 2009 -10 2010 -11 2011 -12 2012 -13 Administraton 3.33 3.33 4.33 4.33 4.33 4.33 Administrative Support Staff 5.60 5.50 4.50 4.50 5.00 5.00 - Total 8.93 8.83 8.83 8.83 9.33 9.33 - The chart below is a comparison of per pupil expenditures on Administration for communities that are similar to Reading as well as to the state average. As the chart indicates, Reading is among the lowest of these communities with respect to expenditures for the District Administration. 271Pagc M. Table 4.3 -Per Pupil Expenditures on District Administration as a Percentage of Total Expenses 5.0% 4.5% 4.0% 3.5% 3.0% 2.5% 2.0% 0e\�pc�o,�,Sa oac,¢ks �e\aoS�Pcaoe` Peaa`c�.'�J� �\¢�a� Q, o<< e yi ` ■ FY08 a FY09 ci FY10 Superintendent The role of the Superintendent is to be the chief educational leader for the school district. He works closely with building principals and central office administrators in using available resources to make decisions and provide a direction which is in the best interest of all students. Reading Public Schools is an early adopter for the new educator evaluation system. This system, which will be fully implemented during the 2014 -15 school year, will tie educator evaluation to student performance measures and the quality of professional practice. As an early adopter, the Reading Public Schools is piloting the DESE Educator Plan, which focuses on developing SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Results- Oriented, Timely) goals which focus on student performance and professional practice. All licensed educators in the district, including teachers and administrators are developing SMART goals this year. For the 2011 -12 school year, the Superintendent will be focusing on the following SMART goals. • During the 2011 -12 School Year, the Superintendent will successfully lead the implementation of 100% of all of the district strategic initiatives for the 2011 -12 School Year as outlined by the Reading Public Schools Strategyfor Improvement of Student Outcomes. These initiatives will be measured by the measurable objectives that have been identified by the administrative council. • During the 2011 -12 School Year, the Superintendent will participate in 100% of the sessions of the DESE/M.A.S.S. Superintendent's Induction program and the M.A.S.S. G21 Global Skills Study Group in order to refine his leadership skills as a Superintendent. Over the last 18 months, the Superintendent met with over 1000 staff, students, and community members to gauge their impressions of the Reading Public Schools. The data that was collected from those meetings and other available data helped develop a three year district improvement plan, the Reading Public Schools Strategyfor Improvement of Student Outcomes. This plan which is included in the Superintendent's introduction message of this budget has become the compass for the Reading Public Schools over the next three years. As stated in that plan, the Superintendent will be coordinating the implementation of the following initiatives during the 2011 -12 school year: 281Pagc 169 • Develop and implement a plan to address the social and emotional needs of all students. • Pilot the use of I on 1 learning devices and.`Bring Your Own Technology Device" in the classroom. • Implement high school best practices which include a redesigned freshmen year, senior projects, project - based learning, a redefined schedule, and implementation of the MASS Core graduation requirements. • Review and update Teacher Assessment Process and Administrative Evaluation Process in relation to new state guidelines. • Develop and implement a long range plan to address classroom and program space issues, including making Killam ADA accessible. • Work with the Reading Education Foundation to maximize resources so that they become the Research and Development arm of the Reading Public Schools. The Superintendent also works collaboratively with Town officials and the community to identify common issues and develop ways to address those issues. It is this collaborative effort that has allowed both the Town of Reading and the Reading Public Schools the ability to creatively address common concerns that may derail other communities. In addition to working collaboratively with the community, the Superintendent advocates for the town and school district with state, regional and national legislators and educational leaders. Assistant Superintendent The role of the Assistant Superintendent is to provide leadership to district administrators, teacher leaders, teachers, and staff in the area of curriculum, instruction, and assessment. There will be a continued focus on the national Common Core State Standards as well as the new MA Curriculum Frameworks for both English Language Arts/Literacy and Mathematics that were introduced in 2011. It is expected that these standards will be fully implemented no later than the 2012 -2013 school year. The work to be done will be coordinated by the Assistant Superintendent with teacher committees continuing to analyze the district curriculum and make recommendation for changes and professional development to promote full alignment of the standards. There will be a specific focus on writing at the elementary level, interdisciplinary reading and writing at all levels, and mathematics at the middle and high school levels. Another important focus moving forward will be the proposed implementation of a new. health curriculum at a selected grade at both the middle school and high school levels. The Assistant Superintendent continues to investigate and pursue any new grant opportunities and to oversee the annual entitlement funds that the district receives each year. These entitlement funds include METCO, Academic Support, Title I, Title IIA, and Race to the Top. Other areas of focus include data analysis of state and other assessments, the tiered instruction model, and professional development for teachers. The Assistant Superintendent works closely with the Director of the Extended Day Program as well as the METCO director to promote smooth implementation of both programs. Each summer the Assistant Superintendent leads the annual weeklong induction program for all new teachers. The annual Blue Ribbon National Institute held in Reading in April is overseen by the Assistant Superintendent as well as teacher in- services within the district. The Assistant Superintendent also works closely with the Human Resources Administrator to oversee the district -run substitute teacher program for training for all substitutes. Another area that is coordinated by the Assistant Superintendent is the student exchange programs. The district has participated with two programs where students from Korea and China stay with host families and attend Reading schools. 291Pagc 170 The Assistant Superintendent oversees the district's Bullying Prevention Plan and organizes staff training and components that are required by MA state law. Finance & Operations The Finance and Operations office manages budget, payroll, accounts payable, accounts receivable, purchasing, transportation, facilities, and food services. The preparation of the budget document continues to be one of the most important functions and we continue to work to enhance the transparency of the budget, to provide a clear understanding of how funds are expended, and to I ink those expenditures to student performance. We continue to work toward the development of a true performance management approach that is based on measurable performance goals, indicators and benchmarks and connects expenditures to those performance measures. This includes regular financial and performance reporting to enhance transparency and accountability. With respect to the core business functions of the finance department, namely payroll, accounts payable and accounts receivable, we always seek to enhance efficiency of operations, improve customer service, and promote ease of operation. In FY2011, the business office processed 3,522 requisitions, 3,497 purchase orders, 8,129 invoices, 4,771 cash receipts, and 234 payroll batches to pay 756 employees representing $26 million in payroll expenses. The processing of these transactions was supported in FYI l by just 1.7 FTE administrative assistants, down from 2.0 FTEs in the prior year. This year, that number is back at 2.0 FTE due to additional support needed with the in- sourcing of absence management and substitute placement services. In the introduction to this section, we showed that Reading's expenditures on district administration on a per pupil basis is one of the lowest in the area. With respect to the per pupil expenditure on Business and Finance, Reading is significantly below most of the communities in the area. The chart below compares Reading tojust a few of our neighboring communities as well'as the state average. This data comes from the End of Year Reports filed by each district and compiled by the Massachusetts DESE. In a follow -up survey with area communities, we learned that the number of clerical staff supporting the School Business office in other districts ranges from 3.0 to 5.0 FTEs, making our support staff among the lowest in the region. Table 4.4 -Per Pupil Expenditures — Business and Finance 30�1'age 171 In an effort to minimize errors, improve the timeliness of accounts payable and accounts receivable processing and increase efficiency, we have implemented a number of proactive measures over the last two years. This includes training for administrative support staff, implementing additional MUMS features to automate workflow wherever possible, and. implementing an on -line payment system. The on -line payment system has made it more convenient for parents to pay tuitions and fees via ACH or credit card and has significantly decreased the number of cash receipt entries that secretaries have had to — process.. With respect to purchasing, we continue to competitively bid and aggressively negotiate vendor and trades contracts, pursue collaborative purchasing opportunities, utilize state contracts to further reduce the cost of goods and services and the cost of operations, and ensure compliance with state procurement laws. This past year, we procured a new transportation contract which, for the first time has an optional fourth and fifth year which may help to provide future financial stability. In addition, we secured a new natural gas contract which is extremely favorable to the town with pricing at historic lows. The passage of the Municipal Relief Act last year allowed cities and towns to purchase from national collaboratives and since that time, we havejoined three different national purchasing groups. Through those purchasing contracts, we have realized significant savings, particularly in the area technology. This year, it is our goal to implement a procurement card program as a means of improving the efficiency of small dollar purchases and provide a revenue source to the town from the p -card rebate program. The Finance office has also continued its important role in meeting all application, monitoring, and reporting requirements associated with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act grant funds. During the first quarter of this year, the district expended the last of its ARRA grant funds. However, these reporting activities continue this year as the requirements for the Education Jobs grant funds are similar to those of the ARRA program. We will expend about two - thirds of our EdJobs funding this year with the remainder to be spent in the first quarter of FY2013 to meet a one -time contractual obligation negotiated as part of last year's collective bargaining process. In the area of operations, we successfully closed out the $5.5 million energy conservation program in January of 2011. Not long after this project was closed out, we learned about a new energy conservation funding source namely, the Massachusetts School Building Authority's Green Repair Program. We were successful in securing funding to replace the windows at the Birch Meadow School and the roof at the J.W. Killam School. That worked commended in the summer of this year and is nearly complete at this time. We continue in our mission to make our facilities the best they can be and this year, we have submitted a Statement of Interest to the MSBA for funding to make the Killam School handicap accessible and to make other much needed repairs and improvements to the building. If we are successful in obtaining those funds, this project would be a major initiative during FY2013 and FY2014. In addition, we will also be hiring a consultant to do a facilities planning study so that we are able to proactively address anticipated enrollment increases in the future. Human Resources The Human Resources office is responsible for a number of functions including overseeing the recruitment and hiring of staff; monitoring compliance with all personnel laws, regulations, policies, and procedures; ensuring compliance with collective bargaining terms and conditions; and complying with federal and state reporting requirements. During the 2011 -12 school year, the Human Resources Administrator performed and audit of all personnel practices and procedures to identify gaps in the HR functions of the district. For the current year, the HR Administrator's goal is to reduce these gaps by 25% in order to increase or improve the overall effectiveness of the Human Resources Office. Some planned activities to assist in accomplishing this goal are: customer service /satisfaction surveys out to staff, creating a personnel handbook for staff, 3111'age 172 implementing staff recognition programs, increasing visibility in schools, and updating current evaluation tools to more rubrics -based tools. One of the areas of improvement has been in ensuring that all of our teachers have achieved highly qualified status as defined under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Our progress in this area has steadily improved over the last several years. In 2010 -11, the district achieved the goal of having 100% of its teachers achieving HQ status. - With respect to staff turnover and recruiting, Reading Public Schools hired 49 new staff members for the 2011 -2012 school year. This pool of new employees represents teachers, administrators, paraprofessionals, extended day staff, food services staff, athletic coaches and long term substitutes. For a variety of reasons, we had 45 employees leave the district. Twenty two percent left the district due to retirement, 20% were due to personal reasons, 18% left due to relocation and 25% found other employment in education. The start of the 2011 -2012 school year marked a change in the way Reading procures and manages substitute teacher services. For over a decade, Reading has used outside staffing agencies to meet our professional substitute needs. For paraeducator substitutes and nurse substitutes, a substitute caller coordinated the substitutes and daily absences. This changed for the current school year and Reading now employs its own substitute teachers. To date we have hired 172 teacher, paraeducator, and nurse substitutes to meet our needs for the current school year. On August 30th, Reading Public Schools officially went "live" with Aesop, a web -based substitute placement and absence management solution used by more than 2,500 school districts worldwide. Staff can enter absences at any time and substitutes can search for and accept assignments through the phone or Internet, plus receive automatic notification of open positions. Data & Information Management The primary responsibility for this function is to comply with the data management and reporting . requirements of the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE). The DESE requires reporting of student data through its Student Information Management System (SIMS) three times per year. In addition, districts must also report on educational staffing through the Educator Personnel Information System (EPIMS) three times per year as well. The EPIMS reporting had previously been required just once per year but was increased to three times this year. In the upcoming year, additional requirements resulting from Race to The Top initiatives will require enhancements to the reporting which will eventually enable linkages between student performance data and teacher data. An additional requirement in this area is maintaining the Administrator's Plus database used by schools for scheduling, grading, and tracking of student information, and the maintenance of personnel information in the MUNIS Human Resources module. There are also responsibilities related to maintenance and upkeep of other district databases and systems including Connect -Ed and, more recently, the eSchool on -line payment system. Other Areas In addition to the above areas, the administrative assistants provide clerical support in other departments, including METCO, Health Services, Technology, Athletics and the high school. In addition, some functions that used to be completed at the building level are now being done at Central Office. These supports have evolved over the years due to increased program demands, the increase in the amount of user fees throughout the district, the implementation of MUNIS as well as, budget reductions in some of the above areas. 321Pagc 173 4.2 Regular Day The regular day budget funds all of the salaries and expenses for providing the core instructional programs to our students. This includes the salaries for building administrators, teachers, specialists (e.g. reading, library media, and technology integration), guidance counselors, school psychologists, paraprofessionals, and building secretaries. It also includes stipends for teacher mentors, curriculum committee chairs, team leaders, and department heads. Other compensation includes longevity and sick leave buyback. These salaries are offset by revenues from kindergarten tuitions and the METCO grant. Contract services funded from this cost center include the cost of transportation for our regular education population. Prior to the 2011 -12 school year, we also had a contract for substitute teachers through Kelly Educational Staffing. During the 2011 -12 School Year, we decided to bring substitute services in house and not renew our contract with Kelly Educational Staffing. This change resulted in a savings of $25,000 per year. To accommodate an increase of an additional 172 employees to the school department, additional secretarial time and an increase in the Human Resource Administrator's salary was included in the administration cost center of the FYI budget. There is also an annual fee for AESOP substitute management software. Teacher substitutes are paid at a rate of either $65 or $75 per day depending upon whether or not they hold a Massachusetts Educator license. In accordance with Massachusetts law, the school department is required to provide transportation to any regular day students grades K -6 who live more than 2 miles away from the school they attend. In Reading, the number of children who we are mandated to transport has historically been between 40 and 50 per year. An additional 185 to 200 children who either live within the 2 -mile radius or are in grades 7 -12 are transported as well for a fee. Currently, the fee is $365 per year. The actual cost to transport a child is $450 per year so currently the school district is subsidizing non - mandatory transportation at the rate of $85 per student. The largest expense portion of the regular day budget is to fund the instructional supplies, materials, and other expenses for the district. In Fiscal Year 12, this budget was reduced by 17% or $100,000 to avoid teacher layoffs. In the Fiscal Year 13 budget, the funding has been restored to Fiscal Year 11 levels. This funding is allocated to each building based on enrollment and an established per pupil level of funding. This per pupil amount is $152 per student at the elementary and middle school levels and $175 per pupil at the high school level. Each building principal then allocates his or her building amount based on their school's needs, goals, and priorities for the ensuing fiscal year. Some of the expenses allocated at the district level include curriculum materials, which is funding for the purchase of curriculum materials for new or expanded initiatives such as a Grade 5 health unit on growth and development, a middle school health curriculum (Grade 7 or 8), and a Grade 11/12 High School health curriculum. The administrative software line funds such items as spam filtering software, anti- virus software, Edline, Administrators Plus, Discovery Education, Library Management Software (Follett) and Survey Monkey. The increase reflects the addition of new AP Web Elementary Report Card software program. The increase in the instructional technology line item is to continue to replace student and teacher computers on a 6 to 7 year cycle. Several computers that were purchased during the Reading Memorial High School, Wood End, and Barrows building projects are reaching the end of their life cycle. It is our intent to maintain a consistent amount of funding in this line item for this current budget and future budgets so that we can begin to implement a 6 year computer replacement cycle. In the FYI budget, there is a significant increase in professional development and curriculum development to address several new initiatives that are being implemented by the district or required by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. These include the transition to the new Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks, otherwise known as the Common Core of Learning, the initiatives identified by the behavioral health task force, the adoption of a middle school and high school health curriculum, the implementation of a bring your own device technology initiative at the middle and high school level, and the implementation of the new teacher evaluation system. These initiatives are 33 Page 174 described in further detail below. In addition, this year, $111,000 has been allocated for tuition reimbursement, reflecting recent changes in collective bargaining agreements with teachers and paraeducators. The table below shows the Fiscal Year 2013 Superintendent's Recommended budget for Regular Day. As the data shows, the teachers and specialists line item is increasing by 2.1 % due to a request for staffing in middle school and high school health education and column changes for some staff. In addition, the English Language Learner (ELL) tutor positions were converted in this current school year to a full time English Language Leamer teacher with minimal impact to the budget. This transition is in compliance with state regulations and to better address the needs of the ELL population in our district. There is not a cost of living increase for teachers in the FYI budget due to the recent collective bargaining agreement. It should be noted that all Reading Public School employees over the last two years, including administrators, teachers, paraeducators, secretaries, custodian/maintenance, and food service have had at least one year where they have not had a cost of living increase. Because of this collaborative approach to the current fiscal situation, we have not had to eliminate any current teaching staff over the last three years. The following teaching positions are being requested in the FY 13 regular day budget: 1.0 FTE Middle School Health Education 1.6 FTE High School Health Education 1.0 FTE High School Academic Teacher Currently, the only formal health class that exists in the Reading Public Schools is the Grade 9 Decisions class. In Grades 3 -8, students receive about 10 hours of health education per year in their physical education classes. Students in grades 10, 11, and 12 do not receive any formal health education. During the fall a comprehensive analysis was completed by the Behavioral Health Task Force and the Reading Public School Health and Wellness Department as to the gaps in our health education curriculum. The groups used the 2011 Youth Risk Behavior Survey data, as well as, the Center of Disease Control School Health Index analysis tool. The analysis showed that our PreK -12 Health Education program has significant gaps. At the elementary level, one of the gaps is growth and development in Grade 5, an area that used to be addressed several years ago in collaboration with the Town Health Department. At the middle school level, there are gaps in several areas including substance abuse prevention, growth and development, HIV /AIDS, nutrition, and mental health. At the high school level, similar gaps occur in substance abuse prevention, medication safety, mental health, HIV /AIDS, and growth and development. The funding allocated in the FYI Superintendent's Recommended budget would provide a semester long middle school health education class in either Grade 7 or 8 for all students and a semester long high school health education class in grade I 1 or 12 for all students. The 1.0 FTE Academic teacher is for the High School Behavioral Health program described below in the Special Education budget section. The decrease in the line item, state funding support, is due to an anticipated decrease in the state METCO grant, the increase in the line item, revolving fund support, is primarily from the full day kindergarten revolving fund account. The increase in the paraeducator line item is due to a restoration of some of the paraeducator hours that were reduced in FYI 2, a cost of living increase and the request for an in school suspension coordinator at the high school. Currently, all students who receive a suspension are required to serve an out of school suspension. In most cases, it would benefit a student more to serve a suspension in school where the student could be provided with academic support and engage in community service under adult supervision. The funding requested would provide supervision and academic support for students who are serving in school suspensions. When there are no students in the in school suspension program, this position would provide coverage for teachers to attend special education Team meetings. 341Page 175 Table 4.5- FY2013 Reeular Day Budeet 351Pagc 176 School Actual Actual Actual Current Committee Expended Expended Expended Budget Budget % FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Change Profesional Salaries Administrators 1,185,342 1,277,557 1,265,560 1,272,134 1,301,891 2.3% Teachers & Specialists 15,712,221 15,442;798 16,582,247 17,119,068 17,476,691 2.1% Guidance & Psychology 934,840 950,108 973,135 999,737 996,525 -0.3% Additional Compensation 100,059 69,326 93,276 122,450 121,400 -0.9% Stipends 431,678 431,615 427,046 447,659 449,526 0.4% State Grant Support (125,000) (151,000) (125,000) (125,000) (100,000) -20.0% Revolving Fund Support (400,000) (475,000) (527,000) (620,000) (820,000) 32.3% Subtotal - Professional Salaries 17,839,139 17,545,404 18,689,264 19,216,048 19,426,032 1.1% Clerical Salaries 405,236 426,533 410,703 399,901 415,549 3.9% Other Salaries ELLTutors 36,241 39,406 40,248 - - 0.00/0 Paraprofessionals 593,159 551,333 529,553 589,993 681,667 15.5% Teacher Substitutes 297,193 _ 281,934 390,042 368,752 336,075 -8.9% Subtotal - Other Salaries 926,594 872,673 959,843 958,745 1,017,742 6.2% Contract Services ' Transportation 74,272 74,864 67,640 78,607 61,000, - 22.4% Other Services 20,000 4,506 - - - 0.00/. Subtotal - Contract Services 94,272 79,370 67,640 78,607 61,000 -22.4% Supplies & Materials Office Supplies 21,443 19,578 23,709 20,702 24,575 18.7% Prof] Development Materials 8,143 4,765 6,470 7,282 10,082 38.5% Instructional Supplies 183,887 215,025 223,674 155,834 207,425 33.1% Curriculum Materials 73,072 59,417 136,144 90,935 85,835 -5.6% Textbooks & Consumables 149,081 164,598 218,018 156,617 196,075 25.2% Technology Supplies 44,146 71,351 141,806 77,932 96,960 24.4% Equipment & Furnishings 73,773 177,080 58,360 . 50,481 40,025 -20.7% Subtotal - Supplies &Materials 553,545 711,815 808,181 559,783 660,977 18.1% Other Expenses Professional Development 213,216 148,313 178,866 142,645 247,061 73.2% Equipment Leasing 85,248 74,219 92,491 101,066 88,620 -12.3% Other Instructional Services 7,437 6,891 11,898 6,894 16,700 142.2% Software Licensing 77,695 71,873 73,630 76,610 145,182 89.5% Other Equipment 4,725 857 777 830 1,000 20.5% Instructional Technology 362,268 253,605 - 207,083 46,395 108,300 133.4% Subtotal - Other Expenses 750,590 555,757 S6Q745 374,440 606,863 62.1% TOTAL REGULAR DAY 20 ,569,376 20,191,553 21,500,377 21,587,524 22,188,163 2.8% 351Pagc 176 Curriculum and Professional Development There are several.major areas in curriculum and professional development that will need to be addressed in FY2013. The funding for these areas is recommended in this budget. The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (MA DESE) has released new state curriculum frameworks for English Language Arts and Mathematics in 2011. These frameworks include the Common Core Standards that have been adopted by Massachusetts. In order to ensure full alignment with the new standards, teacher committees will review the current district curriculum and make recommendations for changes. This will be done for both English Language Arts/Literacy and Mathematics. By the 2012 -2013 school year, it is expected that all standards will be implemented. This review by our teacher committees is necessary so that all instruction will be aligned with the new defined curriculum that will become the tested curriculum as well. These standards will be tested on both future MCAS tests as well as the new assessments currently in the design phase by PARCC (Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Career). The new ELA framework (English Language Arts and Literacy in Social Studies/History, Science, and Technical Subjects) will require professional development for all teachers. It is necessary for additional teacher resource materials at the elementary level to support instruction in the three areas of writing as defined by the Common Core. Literacy standards will need to be taught not only by English teachers, but by all content area teachers at the middle and high school level. Professional development on the integration of informational reading and expository and technical writing standards will be necessary to assist all teachers in gaining knowledge in expertise in teaching literacy as well as content. ELA and Mathematics Committees will also need to update all curriculum maps to reflect the new state standards as well integrate technology into each one. The new math framework and standards must also be reviewed and compared to our current curriculum. This may require some changes to be made in the sequence and/or math courses offered at both the middle and high school levels. The middle and high school teachers will continue to develop lessons that integrate the use of the new calculator, the TI Nspire, which has now been introduced at both middle and high school. 2. A second major area for both curriculum and professional development will be the area of behavioral health. The district Behavioral Health Task Force has met since the summer of 2011 and has made a series of recommendations to be implemented over the next three years. These recommendations include professional development for teachers in order to recognize areas of concerns such as anxiety, depression, and others as well as to learn strategies to support all students. As mentioned above, the district is also recommending the adoption of a formal health curriculum at middle and high school levels in specific grades to continue to move forward with the Task Force recommendations. There has been detailed analysis of the 2011 Youth Risk Behavior Survey which has also given the Task Force and RCASA (Reading Coalition Against Substance Abuse) great insight into the behavioral health needs of our students. According to the statistics reported from the survey,.l7% of our middle school students have used tobacco products and 30% reported trying alcohol. Students at both middle schools indicated a number of eating disorders, incidents of violence, as well as sexual activities. At the high school level, students report similar issues but have also indicated the inappropriate decisions being made that include driving while under the influence of alcohol or drug or driving with an impaired driver. Student use many illegal drugs ranging from marijuana to heroin and also abuse prescription drugs. They report binge drinking as well as the use of smokeless tobacco. The school district 36111age 177 strongly believes that we must place our students' behavioral health as a priority and not solely focus on the academics. The proposal to begin formal health instruction is the first step of what we see as a multi -year effort to bring this into all grades. 4. A new teacher evaluation system will be implemented statewide for 2012 -2013. As a Race to the Top grant recipient, Reading is required to participate next year. During the 2011 -2012 school year, the district has served as an Early Adopter District and has worked closely with the MA DESE to refine the proposed system. As part of the full implementation next year, there are several components that must be completed. The first one will be to develop common assessments across all grades and subjects. Teachers will work together on committees to develop these and then share them with colleagues through in- services next year. There is also a requirement to identify specific data measures for the evaluation system so this will necessitate teachers and administrators working together to develop these. 5. Other areas for professional development will include technology, especially the "Bring Your Own Device" initiative at the middle and high school levels, instructional practices that support all learners, data analysis and application of these results to improve student learning. The annual new teacher induction week and mentoring program will continue to acclimate new personnel for an effective transition into Reading classrooms and schools. 6. There is a need for teacher resource materials at grades 3 -5 to address the new writing standards. The district scores with open response answers on the ELA MCAS assessment indicate this as an area of weakness for our elementary students. 7. There will be a need to continue to train new elementary teachers with the Open Circle social awareness curriculum as part of the district's Bullying Prevention Plan. This plan also mandates training for all staff annually that must be included in the budget as well. The middle and high school teachers will continue to implement the Second Step program in grades 6 -8 and cyber bullying prevention and Internet safety at both levels. 8. There will be continued technology training for all teachers to support teaming initiatives across the grades. 9. There are several committees comprised of teachers and administrators that will meet to address needs in the area of Teacher Assessment Process, Safety, Technology, and the Elementary Report Card. Curriculum Update The areas described below are current initiatives that will continue on next year and are reflected in the FYI budget. Elementary • During the 2011 -2012 school year, teachers in grades 4 and 5 are implementing a new spelling program that was developed by local educators. These lessons build upon earlier skills that are taught through the Fundations phonics program. • All elementary teachers are focusing on the new math standards that require mastery and fluency at each grade level. This has necessitated some revisions to the Everyday Mathematics program. Teachers are also aligning the unit assessments with the grade level standards. 371Pae� 178 • A standards -based report card was introduced in grades K -5 which aligns with both the Common Core and MA Curriculum Frameworks. This change away from letter grades will provide more detailed information on student learning as well as personal and social development. These report cards will continue to be refined through the 2012 -2013 school year. • Approximately 40 teachers are completing the Open Circle social awareness curriculum training this year. As this program is part of the district's Bullying Prevention Plan, there will be an ongoing need to continue this next year for new teachers. This training allows for school -wide common language and consistency in approach to developing relationships in all elementary schools. Middle Schools • There remains a critical need for review of the middle school science curriculum. It is outdated and as evidenced by the MCAS scores in Science, there are gaps and topics not currently addressed. During the 2012 -2013 school year there will be a committee of middle school science teachers that will begin to investigate a more effective program for students and make a recommendation for a change for the following year. • All middle school math teachers received training with the TI Nspire calculator and are integrating this new tool into math lessons. They have also begun the process of reviewing math standards and collaborating with each other through the use of Moodie, an online program that facilitates sharing of lessons and resources. • Middle school teachers continue to address critical thinking, collaboration, and creativity through their lessons in all disciplines. During in- services, teachers share best practices to best support student learning. Hieh School • High school teachers continue to focus on the project -based learning initiative. As part of this, school -wide rubrics have been developed to allow for consistency in assessing projects. In- service time has been devoted to this initiative. • In math, teachers continue to integrate various technologies into lessons. These include Autograph which supports graphing, geometry, probability, and statistics as well as the TI Nspire calculator. • This year thejunior class will participate in a special project in lieu of taking mid -term exams. Students will work in small groups to solve a real world problem. This activity is seen as an exciting approach to preparing students for both college and careers. District • The district focus for professional development at the elementary level has been on teaching and assessing using standards. All levels will continue their work on the implementation of the Common Core standards. • All K -12 health and.wellness teachers are completing the School Health Index to finalize recommendations for health education. This information will help identify pertinent topics for instruction. Teachers have also completed training for the Life Skills curriculum. 381Pugc 179 Technoloey In the FYI budget, funding has been allocated to support the replacement of technology in all schools. This will allow for upgrades as necessary for our current hardware, infrastructure, and software. During the past few years, our schools have acquired new technology through the school budget, PTO support, Reading Education Foundation grants, and Federal Stimulus funding. Listed below are some of the - upgrades -and perceived needs for technology. - - Hardware and Infrastructure • SMART Boards in over 90% of the classrooms in the district • 5 wireless computer carts at the middle school level • 5 wireless computer carts at the elementary level • Wide Area Network • Replacement of computers at elementary and middle schools • Apple iPad carts for special education programs • CAD computers and graphic arts lab at high school • MIDI lab at middle and high school • Student to computer ratio of 3:1 • At least 60% wireless connectivity in every school with, 100% at the middle schools, high school, and Killam School • 3 Senteo Interactive Response Systems • Laptops and netbooks for special education programs • Document cameras • Need for extended warranties of critical network Management and Curriculum Software • Lexia Reading Program (K -8) • Destiny Library Automation System (K -12) • Open Office (K -12 Open Source Software - no cost) • Connect Ed Community Notification System (PreK -12) • Edline (PreK -12) • Administrators Plus and SNAP Student Management (PreK -12) • Internet filtering (PreK -12) • MUNIS Financial/HR Management (PreK -12) • Virtual High School (9-12) • School Spring Recruiting and Applicant Tracking (PreK -12) • Test Wiz (3-12) • Discovery Education United Streaming (PreK -12) • Scantron Online Testing (6-8 Mathematics) • Survey Monkey • School Dude Facility Scheduling, Work Order, and Preventative Maintenance System (PreK -12) • eSchool On -Line Fee Payment System • AP Web Teacher We will continue to fund the management and curriculum software out of the FY13 budget. There will be a set amount designated for technology maintenance and replacement. One area where Reading has invested significant funding is professional development for teachers. As seen below, Reading ranks as one of the highest for professional development expenditures as a percent of total per pupil expenditures in the region. 391Pagc SI Table 4.6- Professional Development Expenditure per Teacher 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 FY07 FY08 IFY09 FY10 181 E Reading ■ Belmont a Burlington ■ Chelmsford ® Danvers ® Melrose R North Andover Tewksbury a Wakefield 4011'n e 4.3 Special Education The special education budget funds all of the salaries and expenses necessary to provide special education and related services to the children in our community. The goal of the Student Services department is to provide high quality programs and services within the district and to identify and place children in out -of- district programs only when the programs or services that are offered within the district are not adequate or appropriate to address a child's particular needs. As mandated by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and Section 504 of the Americans with Disabilities Act, we strive to provide programs and services to allow our students with disabilities to be educated in the least restrictive environment that enables them to make effective progress. The figures below show the enrollment data for special education students in Reading, as well as a comparison to other similar communities. Table 4.7- Special Education Enrollment Data with Comparative Communities SY 10 -]1 Reading Melrose North Wakefield Wilmington Winchester Woburn Stale 16.0 16.4 73 Andover 4332 707 16.1 16.7 67 Total 4509 3819 4716 3398 3785 4325 4855 727 Enrollment 17.1 63 2009 -10 4392 780 17.0 17.0 59 # of Students 734 574 637 536 608 709 811 801 w/ Disabilities 58 of Students 16.3% 15% 13.5% 15.8% 16.1% 16.4% 16.7% 17% w /.Disabilities # of Students in 51 41 63 25 52 37 Out of District Placements Salaries funded from the special education budget include the Director of Student Services and the Director of RISE, our early childhood program. Due to a reduction in the IDEA entitlement grant, the salaries for two Team Chairpersons have been switched from the IDEA entitlement grant to the regular operational budget, resulting in a 72% increase in the administration salary line item. In addition, the special education budget funds the salaries of the special education program teachers, leaming center teachers, speech pathologists, occupational therapists, physical therapists, and other related service providers. Other personnel expenses include staffing for our extended year program, special education paraeducators, and 2.0 FTE clerical staff who currently support the department, a reduction of one FTE from last year. These salaries are partially offset by revenues from pre - school tuitions and tuitions from special education students from other districts enrolled in Reading Public Schools. Table 4.8- Reading Special Education Enrollment Data Academic Year Total Enrollment ii of Students w/ Disabilities % of Students w/ Disabilities % of Students w/ Disabilities Statewide # of Students in out of district Placements 2005 -06 4282 694 16.0 16.4 73 2006 -07 4332 707 16.1 16.7 67 2007 -08 4416 753 16.8 16.9 73 2008 -09 4428 727 17.2 17.1 63 2009 -10 4392 780 17.0 17.0 59 2010-2011 4509 734 16.3 17.0 51 2011 -2012 4535 801 17.6 58 411PaC­e 182 The majority of the special education expense budget continues to fund tuition and transportation to out of district schools. As the table above indicates, the number of students in out of district placements had been steadily declining over the past several years with the creation of appropriate in- district programs for Reading students. However this current year, we have seen the addition of seven new out of district placements. One student moved into the district after April last year and we will pick up the cost of funding this student in the FYI 2-13 budget. This figure remains an overall decrease from the reported high, however it does mark close to a 14% increase from the previous year's figures and it was an unanticipated cost that was not fully budgeted. . One of the more significant challenges to the special education budget has been the decline in special education reimbursement grant funding, otherwise known as "Circuit Breaker." The circuit breaker grant is intended to reimburse districts for high special education costs defined as those in excess of three times the state average per pupil expense for special education or approximately $38,000. For every dollar above the threshold, the state has historically reimbursed districts at the rate of 75 %. In FYI 3, it is anticipated that the reimbursement rate will be 65 %, up from the low 40% rate in the prior year. This revenue decrease has resulted in the need to utilize other non - recurring revenues and reduce spending. This cut has been felt across the state and the Massachusetts Association of School Superintendents (MASS) cited two reports, the Massachusetts Business Educations Alliance/Boston Foundation Study and the most recent Mass Budget Study that points out that the foundation budget underfunds special education's actual cost by one billion dollars, in their request to bring special education corrections to the foundation budget and to fully fund "Circuit Breaker." In order to maintain and, in some cases, improve the in- district programs 0.4 FTE teaching positions and 2.0 FTE paraeducator positions were added to the operating budget for FYI 3. At the Barrows Elementary School, a 0.4 teaching position was added to the Developmental Learning Center (DLC) to accommodate the growing student population in this successful in- district program for students with autism spectrum disorders. To adjust for the growth in other district programs we had to add 2.0 FTE paraeducators to Barrows Elementary, Birch Meadow Elementary, Coolidge Middle School and Parker Middle School. Table 4.9- Number of Related Service Minutes /Month Required at Middle School As we continue to build stronger in- district programs and maintain more students in these programs there is an increase in related staffing costs. While many of these programs were created in the last five to six years, we are now seeing these students who entered the programs in pre - school and kindergarten transition to the next level and our staffing for related services has not kept up with this growth in population. The chart above shows the number of hours of related services at the middle school since the 2010 -11 school year and the projected amount of services anticipated in the 2012 -13 school year. As part of this transition from elementary to middle school consultation with school staff also increases from typical one or two staff up to six different teachers depending on the student's academic program 421Pon e 183 SY10 -11 SY11 -12 SY12 -13 Coolidge M.S. 135 minutes /month 270 minutes /month 440 minutes /month Parker M.S. 105 minutes /month 75 minutes /month 90 minutes /month Total 240 minutes /month 345 minutes /month 550 minutes /month As we continue to build stronger in- district programs and maintain more students in these programs there is an increase in related staffing costs. While many of these programs were created in the last five to six years, we are now seeing these students who entered the programs in pre - school and kindergarten transition to the next level and our staffing for related services has not kept up with this growth in population. The chart above shows the number of hours of related services at the middle school since the 2010 -11 school year and the projected amount of services anticipated in the 2012 -13 school year. As part of this transition from elementary to middle school consultation with school staff also increases from typical one or two staff up to six different teachers depending on the student's academic program 421Pon e 183 and time spent in integrated classrooms. Therefore we need to increase our occupational therapy specialists by .2 FTE to accommodate our now larger middle school special education population. We have seen a similar trend with our speech and language pathologists and have had to add .4 FTE to cover the increasing caseload at the High School. Table 4.10- Number of Initial Evaluations and 3 Year Evaluations Conducted in District Another area in which we have experienced an increasing expense is request for independent evaluations funded by the district. We have tried to address these demands through two different avenues. We have sought rulings from the Bureau of Special Education Appeals (BSEA) to determine whether our testing is comprehensive and thorough, and therefore are not required to fund the request, however this results in an increase in our legal fees. We are simultaneously working with our related service providers and special education teachers to ensure that we do in fact conduct thorough and comprehensive evaluations. The table above indicates the increase in initial and three year re- evaluations since the 2008 -09 school year. To this end we have had to increase our budget to cover the costs of additional evaluation instruments and testing protocols and training of our staff. In the FYI budget, we are recommending the addition of a 1.0 FTE district -wide evaluator who would conduct the majority of our initial evaluations, thus ensuring consistency across the district and reducing the testing demands on our building -based school psychologists. Initial evaluations and 3 year re- evaluations are mandatory testing that the district must administer in accordance with IDEA. In order to conduct a thorough and comprehensive assessment, the school psychologist must spend approximately 11 -13 hours per student, including conducting the assessment, scoring it, writing the evaluation, reviewing the student record, conducting parent and teacher interviews, as well as travel time if the student is out of district or in another school. This new staffing model allows school psychologists to devote more time to the counseling and intervention needs of all students in their buildings and allows the district to provide more of the behavioral health support the community has requested and our students have required. As mentioned above, the largest non -salary expense for the special education, budget is out -of- district tuition and transportation. We are continually reviewing our current programs and whenever possible looking at ways to keep even more students in- district. We have looked at our Student Support Program (SSP) in the high school and have found that it is not currently structured to support the needs of some of our most socially and emotionally fragile students. Currently there are eight students in the high school who will need an out -of- district program if we are unable to create a therapeutic program in- district. In order to provide a higher staff to student ratio in a substantially separate setting we are recommending the addition of a 1.0 FTE academic teaching position (budgeted in the regular day budget) and 1.5 FTE Licensed Clinical Social Workers (LICSW). These LICSWs will work across the district to support the increasing behavioral health needs of our students and provide a professional resource to our staff and teachers. One of these social workers will be based in the newly formed therapeutic program at the high school and offer additional support to the guidance and other counseling staff in the building. The other .5 FTE will support students and staff across the district and work as part of our tiered system of interventions targeting both Level 2 and Level 3 students. 431Pa�­c 184 SY08 -09 SY09 -10 SY10 -11 Initial Evaluations 1 127 148 167 3 Year Re- evaluations 1 100 133 155 Another area in which we have experienced an increasing expense is request for independent evaluations funded by the district. We have tried to address these demands through two different avenues. We have sought rulings from the Bureau of Special Education Appeals (BSEA) to determine whether our testing is comprehensive and thorough, and therefore are not required to fund the request, however this results in an increase in our legal fees. We are simultaneously working with our related service providers and special education teachers to ensure that we do in fact conduct thorough and comprehensive evaluations. The table above indicates the increase in initial and three year re- evaluations since the 2008 -09 school year. To this end we have had to increase our budget to cover the costs of additional evaluation instruments and testing protocols and training of our staff. In the FYI budget, we are recommending the addition of a 1.0 FTE district -wide evaluator who would conduct the majority of our initial evaluations, thus ensuring consistency across the district and reducing the testing demands on our building -based school psychologists. Initial evaluations and 3 year re- evaluations are mandatory testing that the district must administer in accordance with IDEA. In order to conduct a thorough and comprehensive assessment, the school psychologist must spend approximately 11 -13 hours per student, including conducting the assessment, scoring it, writing the evaluation, reviewing the student record, conducting parent and teacher interviews, as well as travel time if the student is out of district or in another school. This new staffing model allows school psychologists to devote more time to the counseling and intervention needs of all students in their buildings and allows the district to provide more of the behavioral health support the community has requested and our students have required. As mentioned above, the largest non -salary expense for the special education, budget is out -of- district tuition and transportation. We are continually reviewing our current programs and whenever possible looking at ways to keep even more students in- district. We have looked at our Student Support Program (SSP) in the high school and have found that it is not currently structured to support the needs of some of our most socially and emotionally fragile students. Currently there are eight students in the high school who will need an out -of- district program if we are unable to create a therapeutic program in- district. In order to provide a higher staff to student ratio in a substantially separate setting we are recommending the addition of a 1.0 FTE academic teaching position (budgeted in the regular day budget) and 1.5 FTE Licensed Clinical Social Workers (LICSW). These LICSWs will work across the district to support the increasing behavioral health needs of our students and provide a professional resource to our staff and teachers. One of these social workers will be based in the newly formed therapeutic program at the high school and offer additional support to the guidance and other counseling staff in the building. The other .5 FTE will support students and staff across the district and work as part of our tiered system of interventions targeting both Level 2 and Level 3 students. 431Pa�­c 184 While we focus our efforts on keeping students in- district and providing the highest quality programs there still remains the nearly 60 students in out of district placement. Two of these programs, Landmark and Learning Prep, are petitioning for rate increases and it is necessary to account for these amounts in our tuition projections. By creating new programs in- district and enhancing our already existing programs, we hope to bring a number of these students back from their out -of- district placements. However, we are also aware of some families who have already indicated a desire to seek out -of- district placements and we are in litigation on a number of others. This potential increase in out -of- district placements highlights the importance of funding our program requests, but also marks a potential increase of nearly $200,000 in tuition costs. As these tuitions increase there is also a corresponding rise in our transportation costs. This is offset only by the "aging out" of one of our students who has been in a residential program costing roughly $300,000 a year. The cost of challenging many of these out -of- district placements has also meant an increase in our legal fees. As the social and emotional demands have increased on our students across the district, we are also seeing an increasing number of students who are being hospitalized. While they are receiving in- patient treatment we are still required to educate these students and typically have to rely on tutoring services to do this. The increase in the tutoring budget reflects the actual spending this year and assumes the same high level of need if we are not able to provide the therapeutic supports through the new in- district programming. 441Page 185 18Dte 4.11 -r Y iJ bmcial EDUcation mueet bumma Salaries 124,132 104,952 - 104,811 75,464 - 75,998 0. Other Salaries - School _ Actual Actual Actual Current Committee - Extended Year Services Expended Expended Expended Budget Budget % Additional Compensation FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Char Professional Salaries 4,634 10,398 2,731 21,400 20,600 -3. Administrators 288,925 302,292 235,615 200,773 347,801 73. Therapists & Other Services 935,921 1,027,689 1,039,939 1,090,263 1,130,177 3. Behavioral Health Services - - 25,434 55,000 248,559 351. Teachers & Specialists 2,071,413 2,120,203 2,362,855 2,435,337 2,806,189 15. Extended Year Services 82,696 75,954 92,060 94,000 95,500 1. Additional Compensation 27,625 15,136 22,623 2,650 3,250 22. Revolving Fund Support - (75,000) - (325,000) (376,470) (540,000) 43. Subtotal - Professional Salaries 3,406,580 3,466,274 3,453,526 3,501,553 4,091,476 16. Salaries 124,132 104,952 - 104,811 75,464 - 75,998 0. Other Salaries Paraprofessionals 1,503,349 1,380,498 1,545,292 1,606,521 1,589,988 -1. Extended Year Services 29,039 40,206 43,098 45,000 41,500 -7. Additional Compensation 2,209 1,459 2,001 2,001 2,084 4. Teacher Substitutes 4,634 10,398 2,731 21,400 20,600 -3. Subtotal - Other Salaries 1,539,230 1,432,560 1,593,121 1,674,922 1,654,172 -1. Contract Services 828,127 746,413 516,665 650,777 819,243 25. Consultations 83,195 81,033 25,861 30,000 30,000 0. Therapeutic Services 114,924 34,481 30,044 50,300 51,000 1. Testing & Evaluation - 12,568 9,464 34,428 22,000 8,000 -63. Legal Services 34,309 9,561 18,095 36,000 40,000 11. Tutoring Services 19,723 18,741 30,084 25,000 36,000 44. Transportation 868,643 826,370 896,589 850,000 920,000 8. Subtotal - Contract Services 1,133,362 979,649 1,035,100 1,013,300 1,085,000 7. Supplies & Materials Office Supplies 5,225 5,051 2,187 5,460 2,500 -54. Therapeutic Supplies 21,671 34,321 5,225- 8,000 9,000 12. Instructional Supplies & Materials 14,206 14,138 19,142 21,500 15,000 -30. Subtotal - Supplies &Materials 41,102 53,510 26,553 34,960 26,500 -24. Other Expenses Administrative Expenses 48,509 33,890 30,675 39,200 35,508 -9. Professional Development 12,554 8,333 10,699 25,000 25,000 0. Parent Transportation 40,107 34,676 24,507 43,000 34,000 -20. Software Licensing 13,500 12,782 14,535 15,360 20,100 30. Tuition, Other Districts 27,000 134,042 225,558 390,837 273,237 -30. Tuition, Collaboratives 828,127 746,413 516,665 650,777 819,243 25. Tuition, Private 1,600,472 1,998,854 2,301,436 2,790,452 2,577,755 _ -7. Adaptive Equipment 16,904 47,516 39,537 20,500 18,000 -12. Adaptive Technology 10,161 678 24,522 13,000 13,000 0. Circuit Breaker Offset - - - (1,102,000) (1,290,000) 17. Subtotal - Other Expenses 2,597,333 3,017,183 3,188,133 2,886,127 2,525,843 -12. SPECIAL EDUCATION U 4D1PO�,,''e 4.4 Other Programs This cost center consists of the following functional areas: • Health Services • Athletics • - Extracurricular Activities • Networking and Technology Maintenance The staffing levels for these functional areas are shown in the table below, followed by a discussion of the accomplishments and challenges for each department and the FY13 Superintendent's Requested Budget for each department. Table 4.12-Staffing Levels for Other Program Areas Health Services Nurses I Support Support 2007 -08 1 2008 -09 1 2009 -10 1 2010 -11 1 2011 -12 1 2012 -13 1 + 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ].00 - 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 - 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 - 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 - 0.50 0.50 1 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 - 0.30 1 0.30 1 0.30 1 0.30 1 0.30 1 0.30 - School Building Maintenance Directors & Managers Maintenance Staff Custodians Clerical Support Networking &Telecommunications Technology Maintenance 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 - 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 - 20.00 20.00 20.00 19.00 18.50 18.50 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 - 2.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 5 1.50 Total 41.17 42.17 41.17 40.17 39.67 41.17 1.50 4.4.1 Health Services The Health Services budget funds the salaries and expense for servicing the medical needs of the district's student population. Ninety -six percent of the budget funds the salaries of the eight nurses and the Director of Nurses. Currently, each building has at least one full -time nurse. The Director of Nursing is housed at the high school and provides additional support to its larger student population. The department shares a secretary with the athletics department with 50% of her time spent supporting health services. The district also contracts with a physician (for compliance with MGL, Ch. 71, Sections 53, 54, 55, and 57) who provides medical examination as needed or required to students. The remaining 2% of the budget funds office and medical supplies and equipment for the department. . Overall, the Health Services budget is projected to increase 2.9% or $14,581. Most of that increase is attributable to the increase in professional salaries. The budgeted amount for FY2012 is actually $2,200 below actual. Additionally, a step increase for some employees was negotiated but not anticipated for FY12 and will bean addition to base salaries for FY13. The other salaries line item represents the cost 4611'agc 187 for nurse substitutes and the FY2013 budget was increased to be more reflective of our actual experience in FY2011. Under professional development, $1,000 has been added to pay for training expenses for school nurses. This represents an expenditure ofjust over $100 per nurse. In the past, we participated in a regional grant that covered these expenses but we anticipating that this grant will not be funded for next year. The increase in medical supplies is due for the most part to the growing need to have EpiPens on hand in - various parts of the building. Each year, the nursing department receives increasing requests from school administrators and staff to place EpiPens in other areas of the building due to safety and emergency concerns. The Health Services department has been very responsive to these requests. Table 4.13 -FY13 Health Services Budeet 471 Pagc WE School Actual Actual Actual Current Committee Expended Expended Expended Budget Budget % FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Change Salaries Professional Salaries 368,533 423,986 492,030 471,305 481,121 2.1% Clerical Salaries 14,220 15,297 14,861 14,722 15,252 3.6% Other Salaries 10,583 7,050 9,550 7,000 9,750 39.3% Subtotal - Salaries 393,336 446,333 516,442 493,027 506,123 2.7% Contract Services Professional Development 1,054 - 1,000 - 1,000 - School Physician - 7,859 7,859 7,859 7,859 7,859 0.09'0 Subtotal - Contract Services 8,913 7,859 8,859 7,859 8,859 12.7% Supplies Office Supplies 508 1,111 241 600 600 0.0% Medical Supplies 8,759 6,360 5,053 6,500 7,000 7.7% Subtotal - Supplies 9,267 7,471 5,294 7,100 7,600 7.0% Other Expenses Postage 88 417 88 315 300 -4.8% Travel 271 - - - - - Equipment 1,760 1,299 973 2,000 2,000 0.09/0 Subtotal- Other Expenses 2,119 1,716 1,061 2,315 2,300 -0.6% TOTAL- HEALTH SERVICES 413,635 463,379 531,655 510,301 524,882 2.9% 471 Pagc WE 4.4.2 Athletics The Athletics budget funds the salaries and expenses necessary to operate the High School athletics program. The Reading athletics program has enjoyed a long history of success both on and off the field with numerous state championship titles in multiple sports and equally high number of awards and other recognition for character and sportsmanship. The Athletics program also has a very high participation rate with approximately 60% of our high school students participating in at least one athletic sport during — the course of an academic year. The table below shows the participation rates in our High School athletics programs. Table 4.14 -11MfIS Participation Level by Sport SPORT 06 -07 07 -08 08 -09 09 -10 10 -11 Baseball 47 43 50 52 52 Basketball (B) 39 32 31 39 48 Basketball (G) 33 41 38 33 32 Cheerleading 34 31 42 35 42. Cross Country (B) 41 41 50 37 44 Cross Country (G) 32 26 20 20 21 Field Hockey 54 58 55 51 52 Football 89 88 87 101 94 Golf 14 12 12 15 12 Gymnastics 17 14 13 24 21 Ice Hockey (B) 47 49 47 53 54 Ice Hockey (G) 16 21 20 18 24 Indoor Track (B) 95 84 94 86 84 indoor Track (G) 71 82 79 87 89 Lacrosse (B) 75 78 85 81 76 Lacrosse (G) 59 62 55 59 72 Outdoor Track (B) 108 91 88 74 69 outdoor Track (G) 94 83 74 .70 74 Soccer(B) 53 62 60 58 64 Soccer (G) 36 40 41 55 60 Softball 47 43 46 42 43 Swimming (B) 30 20 17 20 20 Swimming (G) 27 27 26 24 25 Tennis (B) 15 19 19 12 21 Tennis (G) 11 14 10 13 16 . Volleyball 32 33 38 34 37 Wrestling 44 43 46 45 52 Total 1260 1237 1243 1238 1298 As this data indicate, participation rates increased 4.9% between FY2010 and 2011. Participation levels for FY2012 appear to be tracking FY2011 levels despite the $40 increase in user fees. During the 2011 fall sports season, participation was up 1.6 %, an increase of seven students from the previous year. 481 Page ME Sixty-three percent of the athletics budget is used to fund the salaries of coaches, the director and support staff. These salaries are partially offset by the user fees collected as well as gate receipts from games. In FY2013, the reliance on user fee revenue has been increased by close to 14 %. This will not come from an increase in user fees but from drawing down the revolving fund balance by more than what we anticipate receiving. While not a long tern sustainable solution, it will assist in balancing the FY2013 budget. With an offset amount of $330,000, revolving fund support will cover about 70% of the athletics salary expense or about 44% of the total athletics budget. — In FY2013, other salaries, comprised predominantly of coaches' salaries, increases by nearly $50,000. This is because the FY2012 budget assumed that $50,000 in coaching salaries would be charged to the EdJobs grant. When compared to the FY2011 actual expenditures, the FY2013 figure reflectsjust a 1.0% increase. The contract services area increases by 6.9% in the requested budget for FY 13. The equipment maintenance line funds the refurbishment of football equipment (including helmets, girdles, pads, pants and shirts) as well as hockey shirts. Assumed increases in participation will result in additional equipment refurbishment needs. Facility rental expenses include the rental of the Burbank Ice Arena for hockey and the Burbank YMCA for the swim teams. There are also several hours of indoor tennis practice time included as well. These rates have been increasing each year. Last year we spent $28,000 for ice time and $22,250 for swim time. For the current year, we are anticipating the ice time to increase to $36,000 due to the additional time needed for the new N Girl's Hockey team. For FY2013, we are projecting ice rental expense of $38,000 and pool rental fees of $24,000. With respect to transportation, the rates are set based on the transportation contract with the bus company. These rates do increase next year by 2.1 %. The total reflected in the FY2013 budget is based on an assumed 325 regular season games and 15 tournament games which is reflective of actual past experience. Officiating fees are based on rates set by the MIAA and the number of athletic events in which each team competes each year. The supply budget includes office supplies, field supplies, trainer supplies, team supplies, and uniforms. The budget for trainer supplies is increased over FY2012 to be more reflective of average expenditures in the prior years. Team supplies include such things as balls and pucks, mouth guards, swim caps, chalk, and scorebooks for all of the various teams. The amounts are based on the average and projected number of participants in each sport and the number of games. Funding for uniforms has been inconsistent over the past several years. However, the athletics department would like to implement an annual replacement cycle beginning in FY2013 that would permit the replacement of uniforms for one varsity sport team each year. Only those varsity sport uniforms that remain the property of Reading Public Schools would be included in this replacement cycle (e.g. football, hockey, baseball). Those uniforms that are purchased and retained by the student athlete would not be included. With this type of replacement cycle, the varsity uniforms would be refurbished and passed down to the sub - varsity teams thereby allowing replenishment at that level as well. Other expenses include conferences for the athletic director or coaches, event entry fees, awards that are given out during sports banquets each year, equipment replacement, and dues and memberships. The increase in equipment expenses will be used to fund specialized equipment that we have had to purchase for athletes who have sustained concussions. We have had to purchase 2 -4 special helmets for athletes over the past several years to ensure proper protection following injury. With respect to event entry fees versus dues and memberships, expenses have been charged randomly to these two categories in the past. We have provided clearer definitions for these expense categories such that these two lines are more appropriately budgeted in FY2013. In FY2011, the combined total of event entry fees plus dues and memberships was $10,042. In FYI 3, that amount is consistent, although slightly lower at $9,637. Event entry fees are the amounts that are paid for teams to enter non - league competitions. Historically, these fees have paid for track, cross country, cheerleading, and wrestling events. Dues and memberships include our MIAA membership, the Middlesex League track assessment, 491Fagc .ul and the Director's memberships to the Massachusetts Athletic Directors Association, the Middlesex League Athletic Directors Association, the National Interscholastic Athletic Administrators Association, and the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance. Table 4.15 -FY13 Athletics Budget 501Pu�-c 191 School - -' - Actual- Actual - Actual Current Committee Expended Expended Expended Budget Budget % FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Change Salaries Professional Salaries 62,228 81,990 75,305 75,998 77,488 2.09% Clerical Salaries 16,796 17,483 22,111 18,169 18,309 0.8% Other Salaries 347,024 356,953 376,015 331,148 379,011 14.5% Revolving Fund Support - (220,000) (230,000) (290,000) (330,000) 13.8% Subtotal - Salaries 426,048 236,426 243,431 135,315 144,808 7.0% Contract Services Equipment Maintenance 7,184 8,925 8,329 10,000 13,044 30.4% Field Maintenance 4,833 2,450 5,793 4,000 4,358 9.0% Facility Rentals 45,334 49,362 51,409 58,286 62,400 7.1% Transportation 79,350 70,027 74,060 79,440 83,300 4.9% Officials 55,638 59,382 56,409 58,000 61,307 5.7% Police Detail 7,935 5,581 6,399 7,000. 7,306 4.4% Subtotal - Contract Services 200,274 195,727 202,399 216,726 231,715 6.9% Supplies Office Supplies 847 806 1,019 1,000 990 - 1.0'/0 Field Supplies 363 - 69 1,000 500 -50.09/o Trainer Supplies 5,075 3,962 3,885 3,500 4,800 37.1% Team Supplies 6,656 3,398 5,062 5,000 8,325 66.5% Uniforms 4,944 220 1,260 3,500 5,000 42.9% Subtotal - Supplies 17,886 8,386 _ 11,296 14,000 19,615 40.1% Other Expenses Professional Development 945 165 - 200 250 25.09/ Event Entry Fees - - 6,212 1,000 2,997 199.7% Awards 3,511 4,384 2,028 2,500 3,D00 20.0% Equipment 9,446 10,129 5,488 10,000 12,060 20.6% Travel 1,652 68 - 1,500 - - 100.00% Dues & Membershiops 6,931 6,527 3,830 3,600 6,640 84.4% Subtotal - Other Expenses 22,486 21,274 17,558 18,800 24,947 32.7% TOTAL - SCHOOL ATHLETICS 666,693 461,812 474,683 384,841 421,084 9.41% 501Pu�-c 191 4.4.3 Extracurricular Activities The Extracurricular Activities budget funds the salaries, stipends, and a small portion of the expenses necessary to offer extracurricular activities at the high school and the two middle schools. These activities include the high school drama and band programs, the middle school drama and band programs, and several other school committee approved activities. As with athletics, these programs are critical to the education of the whole child and provide opportunities for students to grow, learn, and excel in activities that generate enthusiasm and passion outside of the classroom. They also offer students the chance to develop confidence, character, relationships, and leadership abilities. The drama and band programs at our schools are very well accomplished winning regional, state, and even national honors each year. In addition, many of our competitive academic teams have excelled in regional, state, and national competitions. The extracurricular activities budget shows an increase of 16.8% for FY2013 which is an increase of $6,579. The primary reason for this is an addition of $8,000 to fund the partial restoration of the stipend costs necessary to keep the fitness center open to students after school. The modified plan would allow for the fitness center to be opened for ninety minutes after school for 150 of the 185 school days. The majority of the extracurricular budget is used to fund the salary of the extracurricular activities coordinator as well as the stipends for the various advisors. The majority of the stipends included here are for the High School Drama and Band programs. Contract services includes the cost of renting equipment for drama productions (such as light, set or sound equipment) or for band competitions. The band program rents vehicles during the course of the year to transport band equipment to and from competitions. Training funds are used to provide leadership training to student leaders. Travel represents the cost to transport the band to various competitions as well as academic teams. Other expenses include event entry fees (for band, drama, as well as math and science teams), dues and memberships (including New England School Bands Association and National Honor Society), royalties paid for the rights to drama productions, and equipment expenses to replace or refurbish band equipment or for drama productions. One will notice that expenses for such items as production sets or costumes for drama productions, uniforms and instruments for band members, printing and publication of yearbooks or student publications and many other such costs are not reflected in this budget as those are paid either by parent booster organizations or individual parents, or through the revenue received from user fees, ticket, advertisement, refreshment, or merchandise sales. While an exact figure is not known, it is estimated that the extracurricular budget likely funds less than 30% of the actual costs attributable to these programs and activities. Parent organizations such as Parents Supporting Student Theater or the Reading Band Parents Organization raise tens of thousands of dollars each year which are used to offset a significant portion of the expenses need to fund these outstanding programs. 511Pugc 192 Table 4.16 -FY13 Extracurricular Activities Budget 4.4.4 Networking and Technology Maintenance The networking and technology maintenance budget funds the salaries and expenses required to operate, service, repair, and maintain our technology infrastructure including our wide area network, wireless networks, servers, computer hardware and peripheral devices, and telecommunications equipment. Eighty-five percent of this budget is used to fund the salaries of the district staff that perform these services including a network administrator, a 0.2 FTE districtwide technology specialist and 3.5 FTE computer technicians. The remainder of this budget funds our Connect -Ed emergency notification system license, telephone equipment repairs, internet service, and miscellaneous supplies and equipment needed to maintain the district's technology infrastructure. The networking and technology maintenance budget for FY2013 increases by 27.1 % or $66,558. Of this increase $54,000 is attributed to the request for an additional 1.5 FTE computer technicians. Throughout the district, we now have 1,800 computers that are being maintained by just 3.5 computer technicians. That is a ratio of 514 computers per technician. According to the 2011 Department of Elementary and Secondary Education report on Technology In Massachusetts Schools, the recommended ratio of technicians to computers should be one technician for every 200 computers. During the current school year, the technology department implemented a work order system to track the number of requests for 521Pa�,c 193 School Actual Actual Actual Current Committee Expended Expended Expended Budget Budget % FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Change Salaries - - - - - - - Professional Salaries 29,727 32,147. 31,577 31,928 32,566 2.0.5 Stipends 37,199 40,529 41,104 29,218 35,869 22.8% Revolving Fund Support - (24,000) (48,770) (40,000) (42,000) 5.09/6 Subtotal - Salaries 66,925 48,676 23,911 21,146 26,435 25.056 Contract Services Equipment Rental 941 - 1,000 1,000 0.0D/6 Vehicle Rental - - 389 1,OD0 600 -40.0% Training 1,125 1,303 588 1,500 450 -70.0% Transportation 8,690 8,024 10,065 8,500 9,490 11.6% Subtotal - Contract Services 9,815. 10,269 11,041 12,000 11,540 -3.856 Supplies & Materials 1,089 - 1,500 700 -53.3% Other Expenses Event Entry Fees 1,562 173 150 500. 1,000 100.0% Dues & Memberships 951 315 660 1,000 550 - 45.00A Royalties 1,065 585 - 2,000 2,500 25.056 Equipment 4,254 2,290 2,729 1,000 3,000 200.0.5 Subtotal - Other Expenses 7,832 3,363 3,539 4,500 7,050 56.-PAo TOTAL - EXTRACURRICULAR 85,661 62,308 38,491 39,146 45,725 16.8•A 4.4.4 Networking and Technology Maintenance The networking and technology maintenance budget funds the salaries and expenses required to operate, service, repair, and maintain our technology infrastructure including our wide area network, wireless networks, servers, computer hardware and peripheral devices, and telecommunications equipment. Eighty-five percent of this budget is used to fund the salaries of the district staff that perform these services including a network administrator, a 0.2 FTE districtwide technology specialist and 3.5 FTE computer technicians. The remainder of this budget funds our Connect -Ed emergency notification system license, telephone equipment repairs, internet service, and miscellaneous supplies and equipment needed to maintain the district's technology infrastructure. The networking and technology maintenance budget for FY2013 increases by 27.1 % or $66,558. Of this increase $54,000 is attributed to the request for an additional 1.5 FTE computer technicians. Throughout the district, we now have 1,800 computers that are being maintained by just 3.5 computer technicians. That is a ratio of 514 computers per technician. According to the 2011 Department of Elementary and Secondary Education report on Technology In Massachusetts Schools, the recommended ratio of technicians to computers should be one technician for every 200 computers. During the current school year, the technology department implemented a work order system to track the number of requests for 521Pa�,c 193 C technology support or assistance. Within the first five months of this school year, they had logged over 2,000 work orders. Due to the lack of staffing, the median time to complete a technology work order has been 5 days with the average being 10 days. What our data is showing is that we do not have enough technology staff to address routine issues and special projects such as upgrading software and hardware. Given the heavy reliance of our staff on technology and its extensive integration into the classroom, it is highly problematic to ask a teacher to be without a computer or other technology hardware for that length of time. It causes significant disruption to their lesson planning and instructional delivery and has a an adverse impact on teacher morale as well. Table 4.17 -FY13 Networkine and Technoloev Maintenance Budget 531Page 194 School Actual Actual Actual Current Committee Expended Expended Expended Budget Budget % FY2009 FY2010 FY2012 FY2012 FY2013 Change Salaries Professional Salaries 79,552 70,905 71,986 72,590 76,234 5.0% Other Sal aries 128,922 133,709 137,876 135,390 195,252 44.2% Subtotal - Salaries 208,475 204,614 209,862 207,980 '271,485 30.5% Contract Services Internet 1,320 1,440 1,515 1,440 1,644 14.2% Emergency Notification 15,556 15,480. 16,232 15,600 16,232 4.1% Consulting - - 595 - - - Subtotal- Contract Services 16,875 16,920 18,342 17,040 17,876 4.9% Supplies 2,399 - - - Other Expenses Software 8,752 2,860 2,500 2,000 600 -70.0% Telephone Repair 11,245 11,766 15,883 15,000 17,617 17.4% Equipment 352 30,000 - 4,000 5,000 25.0 -A Subtotal - Other Expenses 20,348 44,626 18,383 21,000 23,217 10.6% TOTAL - TECHNOLOGY 248,097 266,160 246,587 246,020 312,578 27.1% 531Page 194 Table 4.18- Students per Modern Computer, Reading versus Comparable Communities OIZI tcoca. 5`; sko�a c,¢�5 \`OH z 0 aA rod rya V`oc e� roc s awe ya �o 541Pag 195 4.5 School Building Maintenance The School Building Maintenance budget funds the salaries and expenses necessary to operate and maintain our school buildings. This includes the salaries of the custodial and maintenance staff, the Director of Facilities, the Energy and Facilities Services Manager and one full -time secretary that supports the department. Salaries account for the majority of the School Building Maintenance operating budget at 40 %. The revenue offset represents the revenue generated from the rental of our school facilities for use by town and other area non - profit and for - profit organizations. The next largest share of the School Building Maintenance budget funds energy and utility expenses including natural gas, electricity, and water and sewer. In FYI 1, these items represented 35% of the total expenditures within this cost center, down from 44 %just two years prior. Building repairs represent another 13% of the budget while contracted services (including inspections, testing, repair, and cleaning services) make up another 12 %. Custodial supplies, and other miscellaneous expenses make up the remainder of the budget. The Facilities Department maintains and cleans 771,050 square feet of school building space. Our 18 full -time school building custodians are responsible for cleaning over 40,000 square feet per shift or 5,000 square feet per main hour. This figure is high when compared to both other districts as well as to national benchmarks for the amount of square footage per person and per hour. The Facilities Department also employs three full time maintenance staff including one licensed master plumber and two maintenance technicians. Given the square footage of our facilities, this translates to roughly 250,000 square feet of space maintained per maintenance staff. During fiscal year 2011, the Facilities Department received a total of 2,288 work orders including preventative maintenance work orders that are automatically generated through the School Dude Preventative Maintenance module. The total number of work orders completed was 2,185 and the average time to complete a work order was seven days. With respect to facility use, we have one of the highest utilization rates in the region as measured by the total hours of non - school use of facilities. There were over 5,000 scheduled events in our schools last year, with approximately 60% being Reading Public School events. Of the remaining, 998 were billable rentals that generated a total of $190,136 in revenue for an average of $190.52 per billable event. Reading Recreation also scheduled 718 events for which we received $25,000 in revenue for an average of $34.82 per event or $155.70 below average market value. If recreation events were charged at the average market rate, an additional $111,792.60 in revenue would have been generated. In January of 2011, the energy conservation performance contracting project was completed after 18 months of construction activity. During fiscal year 2010, with the project just 60 %complete, we achieved savings of just over $300,000 which was used to offset the debt used to fund the project. Additional savings of over $50,000 were realized last year, bringing the total annual savings to over $350,000 per year. In Fiscal Year 2012, we were invited to participate in the Massachusetts School Building Authority's Green Repair Project receiving 47% reimbursement grants to replace windows at the Birch Meadow Elementary School and the roof at the Killam Elementary School. That work is nearly complete and will bring additional energy savings in the future. During the upcoming year, the Facilities Department will be working with the Director of Finance and Operations to compete for MSBA funding under the Accelerated Repairs Program to allow us to make, the Killam school handicap accessible, replace the remaining windows in the building, provide enhanced fire protection, and renovate the main office of the school. If successful, we are hopeful that the work would commence in the late spring to early summer of 2013. 551Page 196 i avie 4.IY -r z is JCHUUI uuuumK rvtaLn Lena nm ouugvt 2,172 2,985 1,000 1,000 0.0°01, Elevator 15,350 16,011 16,307 School 22,038 2. Actual Actual Actual Current Committee 5,005 2. Expended Expended Expended Budget Budget % -17. FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Change Salaries Cleaning Services 238,597 237,742 237,876 228,557 231,562 Professional Salaries 212,103 149,781 155,294 156,062 162,051 3.8% Clerical Salaries 35,910 36,678 37,446 38,374 38,718 0.9% Custodial Salaries 754,599 699,915 741,817 744,859. 759,104 1.9 %. Maintenance Salaries 142,324 138,666 148,835 152,683 157,653 3.3% Substitutes 54,686 92,475 69,733 m'000 72,297 3.3% Overtime 66,043. 72,377 94,916 103,000 92,758 -9.9% Revolving Fund Support (505) - (75,000) (145,000) (165,000) 13.8 %! Subtotal - Salaries 1,265,160 1,189,892 1,173,041 1,119,977 1,117,581 -0.2% Contract Services 1,274 2,172 2,985 1,000 1,000 0.0°01, Elevator 15,350 16,011 16,307 21,607 22,038 2. Alarms 4,839 6,126 4,023 4,884 5,005 2. Fire Equipment 16,477 16,871 12,533 25,785 21,295 -17. Heating, Ventilation, A/C 42,793 25,001 26,320 34,925 37,330 6. Cleaning Services 238,597 237,742 237,876 228,557 231,562 1. Other Services . 45,790 31,400 68,188 31,684 41,747 31. Software Licensing - 4,234 4,234 4,234 . 4,234 0. A /EServices - - 35,950 - 12,000 - Subtotal - Contract Services 363,846 337,385 405,431 351,676 375,212 6. Office Supplies 1,274 2,172 2,985 1,000 1,000 0.0°01, Maintenance Supplies 3,551 2,180 4,443 5,000 5,893 17.9% Custodial Supplies 85,891 85,595 87,511 80,210 85,468 6.6% Subtotal - Supplies 90,716 89,948 94,938 86,210 92,361 7.1% Other Expenses Electricity 659,699 562,686 529,261 667,780 618,375 -7.4% Natural Gas 534,842 487,224 478,367 467,115 456,358 -2.3% Water &Sewer 80,106 72,500 87,697 93,950 90,385 -3.8% Energy Management 330,030 43,507 - - - - Building Repairs 362,749 598,210 532,508 379,709 412,963 8.8% Equipment 45,977 .13,058 14,297 6,988 6,987 0.0% Professional Development 581 - - 320 1,500 368.8% Uniforms 9,079 9,071 8,209 10,430 8,850 - 15.1 °% Gasoline 9,207 7,892 9,676 10,000 10,470 4.70/a Travel Reimbursement 3,993 - - 4,000 4,000 0.00/. Software - - 955 955 955 0.00/0 Subtotal- Other Expenses 2,036,263 1,794,149 1,660,971 1,641,247 1,610,944 -1.9% SCH BLDG 197 561Page The FY2013 Superintendent's Requested Budget shows a decrease of 0.1 % driven primarily by continued decreases in natural gas and utility expenditures. Much of this additional savings is due to the very competitive pricing available in the natural gas market which enabled us to secure a long term natural gas contract at historical low pricing levels. In addition the Facilities Department continues to aggressively manage the use of overtime, which is also heavily weather dependent and can Fluctuate dramatically when we have difficult winters. Finally, we have also increased the use of the revenue from school building rentals. - Table 4.20 - School Building Maintenance Staffing Category 2007 -08 2008 -09 2009 -10 2010 -11 2011 -12 2012 -13 +/( -) school Building Maintenance Directors & Managers MaintenanceStaff Custodians Clerical Support 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 - 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 - 20.00 20.00 20.00 19.00 78.50 78.50 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - Total 27.00 27.00 26.00 25.00 24.50 24.50 - The charts below illustrate the consumption per square foot for natural gas, electricity, and water for each of our school buildings. Consumption per square foot is a common metric of energy efficiency and, as the charts below show, the efficiency of our buildings has improved dramatically over.the past four years. There are a couple of anomalies below, primarily at the Coolidge Middle School. These apparent efficiency reversals were caused by a couple of incidents of system or equipment malfunctions that resulted in excessive natural gas and water consumption prior to equipment being repaired. On a positive note, it is the energy and utility management and monitoring systems that now allow us to identify and address problems in a more timely fashion. Table 4.21 - Natural Gas Consumption per Square Foot 11 0.80 0.20 t. 1 0.00 Barrows Birch Joshua J.W. Wood End Coolidge Parker RMHS Meadow Eaton Killam 2007-08 0 2008-09 009-10 010-11 57111 age Um Table 4.22 - Electricity Consumption per Square Foot Table 4.23 -Water Consumption per Square Foot 581Pngc 199 10.00 8.00' 6.00 4.00 2.00 ' Barrows Birch Joshua J.W. Wood Coolidge Parker RMHS Meadow Eaton Kiilam End N 2007 -08 ■ 2008 -09 2009 -10 =- 2010 -11 Table 4.23 -Water Consumption per Square Foot 581Pngc 199 4.6 Town Building Maintenance The Town Building Maintenance budget funds the salaries and expenses necessary to operate and maintain our seven municipal buildings which include Town Hall, Reading Public Library, Reading Senior Center, the Department of Public Works Garage, the Police Station, and the Main Street and Woburn Street Fire Stations. The total square footage for these seven buildings is 137,062. The department includes 3.0 FTE custodians, two who service the buildings during the day shift and one during the evening shift. The building is also serviced by the three maintenance staff that are funded entirely from the School Building Maintenance budget, as are the Director of Facilities, the Energy and Facilities Services Manager and the one full time secretary that supports the department. Salaries account for one - quarter of the expenditures of this department. Thirty-eight percent of the budget funds energy and utility expenses while 28% funds building repairs and maintenance services. Eight percent of the budget funds the cleaning services contractor that is used to clean the Town Hall, Reading Public Library, the Police Station, and the Senior Center. Table 4.24 =FY13 Town Building Maintenance Budget 591Pagc 200 School Actual Actual Actual Current Committee Expended Expended Expended Budget Budget % FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Change Salaries Custodial Salaries 120,701 120,033 116,066 125,856 126,046 0.2% Substitutes - - - 610 700 14.7% Overtime 28,498 38,784 32,197 40,000 40,000 0.0% Additional Compensation 1,589 1,743 1,743 1,743 1,743 0.0% Subtotal - Salaries 150,788 160,559 . 150,006 168,209 168,489 0.2% Contract Services - Cleaning 61,240 41,922 44,340 44,344 56,500 27.4% Elevator 16,687 14,957 13,060 13,320 13,452 1.0% Alarm 1,720 2,474 6,099 10,715 10,821 1.0% Fire Equipment 10,032 7,765 4,885 2,535 2,562 1.0% Heating, Ventilation, A/C 31,181 20,652 34,812 9,400 9,494 1.0% Other Services 10,436 4,115 1,771 14,476 13,561 -6.3% Subtotal - Contract Services 131,295 91,886 104,967 94,790 106,389 12.2% Supplies 12 ,911 12,731 12,591 13,620 13,707 0.6% Other Expenses Electricity 186,133 159,959 160,945 171,650 155,600 . -9.4% Natural Gas 131,635 117,446 138,506 87,700 93,000 6.0% Water &Sewer 15,893 16,054 16,230 16,300 17,450 7.1% Building Repairs 113,579 106,076 193,318 196,273 148,182 -24.5% Uniforms 905 725 1,029 1,335 1,350 1.1% Subtotal - Other Expenses 448,145 400,260 510,028 473,258 415,582 -12.2% TOTAL -TOWN BLDG MAINTENANCE 743,140 665,436 777,591 749,877 704,166 -6.1% 591Pagc 200 In FY2013 the Town Building Maintenance Budget is projected to increase slightly by 0.6 %, an increase of $4,289. This increase is driven primarily by a projected increase in cleaning services. The current cleaning services contract for town buildings is due to expire at the end of the current year. The contract rates for the current contract are significantly below market value and, in fact, the contractor has struggled to fulfill the contract terms and conditions. We are anticipating that the bids we receive subsequent to the next procurement process will be closer to the rates we were experiencing back in - FY2008 and FY2009 and so the budget has been increased in anticipation of this. We do expect to see continued savings in electricity and feel that our FY2012 figure may be slightly high based on the actual experience from 2010 and 2011. With respect to natural gas, we are not seeing the level of savings anticipated and, while our FY2013 projected amounts are above FY2012 budget - amounts, they are still substantially below historical levels due to the implementation of energy conservation measures. The charts below illustrate the consumption per square foot for natural gas, electricity, and water for each of our town buildings. Consumption per square foot is a common metric of energy efficiency and, the charts below show general improvement in this area for all buildings. The consumption figures used in the charts below are not weather adjusted. As a result, in many cases 2010 -11 figures appear to indicate that the buildings were less efficient than the prior year. However, 2010 -11 was a much colder year than 2009 -10. Table 4.25 - Natural Gas Consumption per Square Foot The chart below shows that electricity consumption per square foot, which is not driven by weather but more by building use, has trended downward overall across most town buildings. 601PaC­c 201 1.20 1 �� ---------------- ---- ---- --- -- -------- - - -._. 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 Town Hall Police Senior Woburn Main Fire Public DPW Station Center Fire Library Garage 9 2007 -08 ■ 2008 -09 x` 2009 -10 v 2010 -11 The chart below shows that electricity consumption per square foot, which is not driven by weather but more by building use, has trended downward overall across most town buildings. 601PaC­c 201 Table 4.26-Electricity Consumption per Square Foot Table 4.27-Water Consumption per Square Foot 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 Town Hall Police Senior Woburn Main Fire Public DPW Station Center Fire Library Garage EN2007-08 02008-09 ��2009-10 r2010-11 611P020- 202 18.00 16.00 14.00 12.06 10,00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 . . . . . . . . . . . Town Hall Police Senior Woburn Main Fire Public DPW Station Center Fire Library Garage N 2007-08 ■ 2008-09 �` 2009-10 s 2010-11 Table 4.27-Water Consumption per Square Foot 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 Town Hall Police Senior Woburn Main Fire Public DPW Station Center Fire Library Garage EN2007-08 02008-09 ��2009-10 r2010-11 611P020- 202 5.0 District Revenues 5.1 Federal and State Grants In the current fiscal year, our district is supported by nearly $4.3 million in federal and state grant funding. This includes $414,707 in federal Education Jobs grant funding. As the table below indicates, other than the $24,466 that was carried forward from FY2011, no further ARRA funds are available to the district and have all been expended at this time. Federal and state grant funding represents 10% of our district's expenditures on education. Table 5.1 -Grant Fund: Historical Expenditures, Current Year Awards, and Projected Awards 6211'a�e 203 Expended Expended Expended Award Projected 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Federal Grants: Title 1 98,564 72,203 87,886 118,809 1 93,521 Title RA 69,562 68,071 68,961 57,569 56,418 Title IID 2,004 1,657 - - - Safe & Drug Free Schools 11,893 9,976 4,174 - - SPED P.L.94 -142 865,937 911,974 914,820 914,219 895,935 SPED Early Childhoold 16,906 16,854 16,864 18,062 17,701 SPED Prof. Dev. 13,877 - - 52,124 - Teaching of American History 551,084 41,034 - - - Teaching of American History 11 327,844 193,330 478,644 - Emergency Preparedness 41,228 .31,421 - - - Subtotal - Non -ARRA Federal Grants 1,671,055 1,481,034 1,286,035 1,639,427 1,063,574 ARRA IDEA 544,002 601,268 - - ARRA Early Childhood 21,590 21,235 - - ARRASFSF 974,264 654,119 316,011 2 24,466 3 ARRA EECBG 150,000 - - - EduJobs 414,707 236,253 Race to the Top ( RTTTT) 5,000 4,625 RTTT Vertical STF Implementation 6,970 Subtotal - ARRA Federal Grants 974,264 1,369,711 945,484 444,173 240,878 Total - Federal Grants 2,645,319 2,850,745 2,231,519 2,083,600 1,304,452 State Grants: Racial Imbalance (METCO) 345,611 326,675 327,244 339,772 332,977 Academic Support _ 12,060 11,300 11,400 11,400 11,172 Circuit Breaker 1,409,865 868,372 121,996 1,846,593 4 1,290,000 Safe Schools Program 1,500 - - - - . School Nurse Prof. Development 4,212 - - - - Total - State Grants 1,773,188 1,206,347 460,640. 2,197,765 1,634,149 TOTAL - ALL GRANTS 4,418,507 4,057,092 2,692,159 4,281,365 2,938,601 (1) Includes $24,076 carryfamard from FYIO (2) Includes $290,013 rollover from FY 10 - (3) Carryfomard from FY 11 I(4) Includes 630,572 carryfomard from FYI I 6211'a�e 203 Our school district receives a number of federal entitlement grants each year under the No Child Left Behind Act including Title I (allocated based on district's poverty rate), Title iIA (the Teacher Quality Improvement grant), IDEA (otherwise known as P.L. 94 -142 based on the special education population of a district) and Early Childhood Education funding. Historically, Reading Public Schools received a number of additional entitlement or competitive grants but these programs have been eliminated or are no longer funded in the federal or state budget. In addition to the federal entitlement grants, we have also been successful in past years in obtaining federal competitive grants such as the Emergency Preparedness grant and the Teaching of American History grant. Currently, we are in the final year of the three -year Teaching of American History grant that has funded a significant proportion of professional development for social studies and history teachers over the past three years. The other federal funding that we have received over the past three years is the ARRA stimulus funds. The total amount that we received over the past three years has been $3,306,955. Without this funding, the district would likely have faced personnel cuts equivalent to close to 40 teachers which would have had a devastating impact on teaching and learning in our district. While these ARRA funds have now been expended, we did also receive over $640,000 in funding as part of the Education Jobs bill which was signed in to law by President Obama in August of 2010. We are currently paying the salaries 19 instructional and support staff positions totaling $414,700 and the funding for these positions will need to shift back to the operating budget for FY2013. The remaining $236,000 in EdJobs funding will be used to pay a one -time $600 payment to teachers in September of 2012 as negotiated during as part of their collective bargaining agreement. The table above also shows a significantly larger figure for Circuit Breaker in FY2012 than FY2011. This is due to the fact that we were able to carry $630,572 forward from FYI 1 due to tuition savings from children who came back to our district or unanticipated out of district placements that either remained in Reading Public Schools or were placed in less costly schools. Due to a number of unanticipated expenses in FY2012, that funding is expected to be needed in the current year. Those unanticipated expenses include the shifting of two team chairs from the IDEA grant back to the operating budget, several unanticipated out of district placements, and increased legal expenses related to some of these placements. Unfortunately, with the expiration of the ARRA grants as well as our Teaching of American History grant, and the lack of any significant Circuit Breaker funds to carry forward into FY2013, we are anticipating a decrease in grant funding of an astonishing 31.4% which is a significant driver in the increase requested to the FY2013 school department budget. As the table below shows, these reductions equate to the loss of $573,261 in funding for salaries for the district which funded 21.6 positions in FY2012. Table 5.2- Current and Projected Grant Funded Positions Grant positic, FY12 FTE FY12 FTE Reduction FY12 Salary FY12 Salary Difference FY13 FTE I FY13 FTE Reduction FY13 Salary FY13 Salary Difference Tale I Regular Education Teachers 1.5 - 86,333 7,924 1.0 (050) 58,268 (28,065) IDEA (P.L. 94 -142) Special Education Team Chairs 2.0 (2.0) 145,067 (150,980) 2.0 - 148,331 3,264 Special Education Teachers 12.0 (1.0) 717,163 (46,039) 11.0 (1.00) 672,335 (44,828) Early Childhood Pre - School Teacher D3 - 18,233 181 0.2 (0.10) 12,600 (5,633) Education Jobs Instructional and Support Staff 19.0 - 414,707 414,707 0.0 (19.00) - 1 (414,707) MFr Director 1.0 - 60,375 400 1.0 - 61,583 1,208 Teaching American History Dlreclor 1.0 - 84,500 2,100 0.0 (1.00) - '00' Total 36.8 (3.0) 1,526,379 228,292 15.2 (21.60) 16 953,1261) (573, 631Pa,e 204 5.2 Special Revenue Funds The district maintains thirty-three separate special revenue funds that were created and are maintained in accordance with the state's municipal finance laws as well as the Department of Revenue and Department of Elementary and Secondary Education regulations. The monies that are deposited into these funds include school lunch receipts, user fee receipts, ticket sale revenues from athletic events and drama performances, tuitions for full -day kindergarten, pre - school, summer school, before and after school programs, in- district special education programs offered to non - Reading residents, and gifts and donations. Revenues from these revolving funds are used to support approximately 7% of the district's total expenditures on education. The table below shows the revenues, expenses, and changes in fund balances between July 1, 2010 and June 30, 2011. Table 5.3- Revolving Fund Status as of June 30, 2011 641Ilagc 205 Balance FY11 FY11 Balance Net 1- Jul -10 Revenues Expenditures 30- Jun -11 Gain /(Loss) Revolving Fund: School Lunch Program 164,842 1,213,467 1,132,757 245,552 80,710 Athletic Activities 175,986 264,178 249,787 190,377 14,391 Guidance Revolving Fund - 4,330 47,432 47,412 4,350 20 School Transportation 578 55,923 56,501 - (578) Coolidge Extracurricular - 8,350 640 7,710 7,710 Parker Extracurricular - 3,905 200 - 3,705 3,705 RMHS Extracurricular - 11,170 11,170 - - RMHS Band - 21,773 18,316 3,457 3,457 Drama - High School 58,756 101,739 122,920 37,575 (21,181) Drama - Parker - 14,253 18,356 10,549 22,060 7,807 After School - Parker 2,749 24,424 18,917 8,256 5,507 Extended Day 45,018 474,548 289,390 230,176 185,158 Drama - Coolidge 24,903 33,804 29,180 29,526 4,623 Adult Education 29,025 27,983 27,675 29,332 307 Summer School 47,830 16,868 18,844 45,853 (1,977) RISE Pre - School 312,803 127,786 180,005 260,585 (52,218) Use of School Property 187,044 148,143. 194,500 140,709 (46,335) Special Education Tuition 432,130 138,141 158,417 411,855 (20,275) Full -Day Kindergarten Tuition 450,742 572,306 544,014 479,033 28,291 Lost Books 9,595 4,935 1,182 13,348 3,753 Elementary Science Materials 3,228 2,175 - 5,403 2,175 Burns Foundation (Coolidge) 5,480 - - 1,181 4,299 11,181) Jump & Go BC /BS (Parker) 3,259 - 509 2,750 (509) District Donation Fund 942 20,160 15,049 6,054 5,112 Barrows Donation Fund 1,565 23,517 1,415 23,667 22,102 Birch Meadow Donation Fund 7,521 4,906 10,245 2,182 (5,339) Joshua Eaton Donation Fund 8,973 1,612 7,142 3,443 (5,530) J.W. Killam Donation Fund 5,484 1,955 6,841 597 (4,887) Wood End Donation Fund 2,101 16,073 13,577 4,598 2,497 Coolidge Donation Fund 11,733 28,358 22,450 17,642 5,909 Parker Donation Fund 7,902 22,888 16,484 14,305 6,403 High School Donation Fund , 14,167 27,899 17,488 25,675 11,508. Special Education Donation Fund 3,335 3,792 792 6,335 3,000 Total - All Funds 2,036,274 3,468,563 3,225,548 2,280,408 244,134 641Ilagc 205 Overall, there was a net gain of $244,134 in our district's special revenue funds at the close of the last fiscal year. The majority of the net increase came from the school lunch program and our before and after school program. Below is a summary of the use of offsets and the revenue projections for Fiscal Year 2013. As these figures indicate, based on current revenue projections and the proposed revenue offsets included in the FY2013 Superintendent's Requested budget, all of these funds would have a positive balance at years end. However, all of these funds, with the exception of Extended Day, would end the year with a net loss, in some cases a significant loss, in fund balance as compared to FY2012. As was mentioned during last year's budget process, we anticipate that revenue fund balances will be nearly depleted by the end of Fiscal Year 2014. At that time, revenues received during the fiscal year would be the sole source of revenue support for that year's budget. In the past, our revenue offsets have been based on the fund balance at the close of the prior fiscal year. With this depletion of the fund balance, the revenue offsets available to support the FY2015 budget would likely need to be reduced by $300,000 - $450,000 unless additional revenues are generated through increased participation or increased tuitions and fees. Table 5.4 -Use of Offsets and Revenue Projections for FY2013 651Pa,c 206 Projected FY13 FY13 FY13 Projected _ Balance Budgeted Projected other Balance Net Revenue Fund 30- Jun -11 - Offsets Revenue Expense 30- Jun -13 Gain /(Loss) Extracurricular Activities 85,602 42,000 100,000 80,000 63,602 (22,000) Athletics 140,377 330,000 260,000 20,000 50,377 (90,000) Use of School Property 97,709 165,000 180,000 112,500 209 (97,500) RISE Tuition 179,585 240,000 120,000 6,500 53,085 (126,500) Special Education Tuition 350,385 300,000 130,000 38,500 141,885 (208,500) Kindergarten Tuition 421,533 820,000 580,000 11,500 170,033 (251,500) Summer School Tuition 36,853 5,000 15,000 19,000 27,853 (9,000) Extended Day 390,176 15,000 475,000 360,000 490,176 100,000 651Pa,c 206 Appendix A: Tuition and Fee Schedules Table Al-ProErram Tuitions and User Fees, 2012-13 Tuition or Fee nEZ2008-W V, 200940' w201011 a 2012A Transportation Fee (annual) Family cap Kindergarten Tuition (annual) RISE Tuition (annual) 2 Day (1/2 Day), 4 Day (1/2 Day) 3 Day (Full Day) 5 Day (Full Day) Athletics User Fee (per season) Individual cap Family cap HS Drama Fee (per season) Family cap HS Band Fee (per band activity) Individual cap Family cap MS Drama and Band Fee $280 $280 $365 $365 $450 $450 $600 $650 $4,000 $4,000 $4,200 $4,200 $1500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $4,320 $4,320 $6,360 $6,360 $85 $175 $175 $215 $220, $450 $450 $500 $440 $750 $750 $800 $85 $100 $100 $100 $440 $450 $450 $450 $175 $175 $450 $450 $750 $750 No fees charged $50 $50 66 1 P a g c 207 Table A2- Facility Rental Fees Schedule, 2012 -13 Location Reading N- Profit Reading F- Profit Non - Reading N- Profit Non- ReadingF- Profit No Minimum 2 -Hr. Minimum 4 -Hr. Minimum Auditoriums RMHS - - - - - - - - -- - -- -- - - - -- - _. Performance $75.0 $110.0 $150.0 Rehearsal $25.0 $45.0 $55.0 Dressing Room $15.0 $20.0 $25.0 Access Lighting/Sound Systems $25.0 $45.0 $55.0 Parker Performance $30.0 $70.0 $100.0 Rehearsal $15.0 $25.0 $35.0 Dressing Room Band Rm $10.0 $15.0 $20.0 Gymnasiums RMHS Field House Main Floor $50.0 $110.0 $130.0 Middle Schools $20.0 $30.0 $40.0 Elementary Wood Floor $15.0 $25.0 $35.0 Elementary Alternate Surface $10.0 $20.0 $30.0 Cafeterias RMHS $30.0 $80.0 $90.0 Middle Schools $15.0 $40.0 $50.0 Barrows & Wood End $12.0 $30.0 $40.0 Birch Meadow, Eaton, Killam $10.0 $30.0 $40.0 Multi Pur pose Rooms RMHS Distance Learning Room $30.0 $50 $60.0 Coolidge Middle Sc 40 $50.0 Parker Middle School $15.0 $35.0 1 $45.0 r "' RMHS $40.0 $55.0 $75.0 Middle Schools $25.0 $40.0 $60.0 Classrooms RMHS $20.0 $30.0 $40.0 Middle $10.0 $20.0 $30.0 Elementary $5.0 $15.0 $25.0 RMHS Fields Stadium $75.0 $150.0 $200.0 Track, Press Box, or Score Board $25.0 $50.0 $75.0 Stadium Lights $30.0 $40.0 $50.0 Game Administrator $35.0 $50.0 $65.0 Exterior Bathroom $20.0 $35.0 $50.0 Practice Field $40.0 $80.0 $120.0 Practice Field Lights $25.0 $30.0 $40.0 Custodial and Kitchen Staff Fees Weekday Custodial (2hr min. $32.0 $32.0 - $32.0 Weekend Custodial 3hr min. . $36.0 $36.0 $36.0 Holiday Custodial (3hr min. $50.0 $50.0 $50.0 Weekday Kitchen (2hr min. $27.0 $27.0 $27.0 Weekend Kitchen (2hr min. $30.0 $30.0 $30.0 Holiday Kitchen (2hr min. $35.0 $35.0 $35.0 Projection De vice/ Computer Rental HS Auditorium includes re 'd technician $50.0 1 $75.0 $125.0 HS or MS Classroom installed technology) $15.0 $20.0 $30.0 MS /ESAuditorium /Cafe /MPR (portable) $10.0 Technology Staff as determined by I-I'Directod $20.0 671Pa,, c M. Appendix B: School Committee Policies on Budget and Finance File: DA FISCAL MANAGEMENT GOALS The quantity and quality of learning programs are directly dependent on the effective, efficient management of allocated funds. It follows that achievement of the school system's purposes can best be achieved through excellent fiscal management. As trustee of local, state, and federal funds allocated for use in public education, the Committee will fulfill its responsibility to see that these funds are used wisely for achievement of the purposes to which they are allocated. Because of resource limitations, there is sometimes a temptation to operate so that fiscal concerns overshadow the educational program. Recognizing this, it is essential that the school system take specific action to make sure education remains central and that fiscal matters are ancillary and contribute to.the educational program. This concept will be incorporated into Committee operations and into all aspects of school system management and operation. In the school system's fiscal management, it is the Committee's intent To engage in thorough advance planning, with staff and community involvement, in order to develop budgets and to guide expenditures so as to achieve the greatest educational returns and the greatest contributions to the educational program in relation to dollars expended. To establish levels of funding that will provide high quality education for the students. To use the best available techniques.and technology for budget development and management as well as for financial processes, procedures and analysis 4. To provide timely and appropriate information to all staff with fiscal management responsibilities. To establish maximum efficiency procedures for accounting, reporting, business, purchasing and delivery, payroll, payment of vendors and contractors, and all other areas of fiscal management. Adopted by the Reading School Committee on September 28, 2006 681page M File: DB ANNUAL BUDGET The annual budget is the financial expression of the educational mission and program of the school department. The budget then is more than just a financial instrument and requires on the part of the Committee, the staff, and the community orderly and cooperative effort to ensure sound fiscal practices for achieving the educational mission, goals, and objectives of the school system. Public school budgeting is regulated and controlled by legislation, state regulations, and local School Committee requirements. The operating budget for the school system will be prepared and presented in line with state policy and will be developed and refined in accordance with these same requirements. The Superintendent will serve as budget officer but he /she may delegate portions of this responsibility to members of his/her staff as he /she deems appropriate. The three general areas of responsibility for the Superintendent as budget officer will be budget preparation, budget presentation, and budget administration. Adopted by the Reading School Committee on September 28, 2006 LEGAL REFS: M.G.L. 15:1G; 71:38N; 71:59 691Pa ,, c 210 File: DBC BUDGET DEADLINES AND SCHEDULES Preparation of the annual budget will be scheduled in stages throughout the school year with attention to certain deadlines established by law and charter. In accordance with Massachusetts General Law, the School Committee will hold a public hearing on a proposed budget before it takes a final vote on a proposed budget. Adopted by the Reading School Committee on September 28, 2006 LEGAL REFS: M.G.L. 71:38N Town Charter 211 701Pn�-c File: DBD BUDGET PLANNING The major portion of income for the operation of the public schools is derived from local property taxes, and the School Committee will attempt to protect the valid interest of the taxpayers. However, the first priority in the development of an annual budget will be the educational welfare of the children in our schools. Budget decisions reflect the attitude and philosophy of those charged with the responsibility for educational decision making. Therefore, a sound budget development process must be established to ensure that the annual operating budget accurately reflects this school system's goals and objectives. In the budget planning process for the school system, the School Committee will strive to: Engage in thorough advance planning, with staff and community involvement, in order to develop budgets and guide expenditures in a manner that will achieve the greatest educational returns and contributions to the educational program in relation to dollars expended. 2. Establish levels of funding that will provide high quality education for all our students. 3. Use the best available techniques and technology for budget development and management. The Superintendent will have overall responsibility for budget preparation, including the construction of, and adherence to, a budget calendar. Adopted by the Reading School Committee on September 28, 2006 71111age 212 File: DBG BUDGET ADOPTION PROCEDURES Authority for adoption of the final school budget lies with the Town Meeting. The fiscal year shall begin on'the first day of July and shall end on the thirtieth day of June, unless another provision is made by general law. The General Laws of the Commonwealth of.Massachusetts also establish the following procedures pertaining to the School Committee budget: Public Hearing by School Committee - As per Chapter 71 Section 38N of the General Laws. "The School Committee of each city, town or regional school district shall hold a public hearing on its proposed annual budget not less than seven days after publication of a notice thereof in a newspaper having general circulation in such city, town or district. Prior to such public hearing said Committee shall make available to the public at least one copy of said proposed budget for a time period of not less than forty -eight hours either at the office of the Superintendent of Schools or at a place so designated by said Committee. At the time and place so advertised or at any time or place to which such hearing may from time to time be adjourned all interested persons shall be given an opportunity to be heard for or against the whole or any part of the proposed budget. Such hearing shall be conducted by a quorum of the School Committee. For the purposes of this section a quorum shall consist of a majority of the members of said School Committee." Adopted by the Reading School Committee on September 28, 2006 LEGAL REFS: M.G.L. 71:34 213 721Pa „c Appendix C: Superintendent's Budget Message The last three fiscal years have been extremely challenging for the Reading Public Schools. A reduction in state aid, coupled with rising in health insurance costs have led to stagnant school funding during FY10, FYI I, and FY12. During this time, the change to the school budget has been a net of 0% (0% in FYIO, 1.1% increase in FYI 1 and a 1.1% decrease in FY12). This overall lack of increased funding has resulted in the elimination of 34.8 FTE positions, primarily in the areas of secretary, paraeducator, and custodian support. In addition to the staffing reductions, allocations for instructional supplies, curriculum, professional development and technology replacement have been significantly reduced with the school having to survive on a fraction of the funding that they have had years prior to FYI 0. These reductions have created a strain on our support and instructional staff and a void in instructional supplies and technology replacement in our classrooms. The reductions in instructional supplies and technology replacement in FYI were meant as a one year budget reduction only to avoid reducing classroom teachers. These reductions, while challenging, were strategically selected to avoid reductions to our teaching staff over the last three years. We are at a point as a school district where we can no longer sustain reductions in personnel or supplies and expect to maintain a high quality school district that focuses on continuous improvement and innovation. This FYI budget is critical in that we must restore some of the reductions that were intended to be one year reductions. We must also address some critical areas that have clearly been adversely impacting our students. Other needs have surfaced as well. Over the next few years, we will need to transition all of our curriculum areas to the Common Core of Learning, which is the newly approved Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks. As part of this transition, curriculum work and materials adoption will need to occur in mathematics, writing, and science. In addition, common assessments will need to be developed in all subject areas and grade levels as part of the new Massachusetts Educator Evaluation system. However, the most critical need in our school district is to address the overall behavioral health of our students. Behavioral health refers to the social, emotional, and behavioral well -being of all students, including but not limited to students with mental health needs. Behavioral health initiatives seek to both reduce problem behaviors, and to optimize positive and productive functioning. The research clearly shows that when programs and policies to improve behavioral health are in place, academic achievement improves, students are more engaged in school, and negative behaviors decrease. Last year, to begin a dialogue about these concerns, the Reading Public Schools hosted three showings of the documentary, Race to Nowhere, which focuses on the increasing stress and anxiety that our youth are facing in today's society. As a result of the community discussions from Race to Nowhere, a group of dedicated teachers, administrators, parents and the Reading Coalition Against Substance Abuse formed a Behavioral Health Task Force. This group met throughout the summer and identified the behavioral health needs of the school district using a DESE Behavioral Health Assessment Tool. From these results, the task force developed a set of recommendations as to what our schools and our community can do to support students, reduce their anxiety, and help them become more emotionally ready to learn and thrive in this community. Several of these recommendations have begun to be implemented while others will require additional resources. In addition to the Behavioral Health Task Force Recommendations, our latest Youth Risk Behavior Survey (2011) showed some areas of concern, most notably in the number of students who are at emotional risk, and have been diagnosed with depression, anxiety disorder, or other mental illnesses. These students often show symptoms of chronic absenteeism, excessive tardiness and may have engaged in cutting, seriously considered suicide, made a plan about committing suicide, or attempted suicide. These students require a level of clinical counseling, therapeutic, and programmatic support that we currently cannot provide. Another area of concern exposed by the YRBS is the lack of a PreK -12 Health Education program. These two areas will be a key focus of the FY13 budget. 7311'a-c 214 The challenge for our community and our school district will be to find ways to maintain the high quality services that our residents expect from Reading Public Schools while providing additional programs and services to address the needs expressed above. One of the primary responsibilities of the Superintendent is to develop a recommended budget request each year that represents what is necessary to provide a high quality educational experience for our children. In prosperous times, that budget would reflect the resources necessary to accomplish all of the district and school improvement goals aimed at maximizing student success for all students. In difficult times such as now, the challenge is balancing what is - necessary for achieving success with what resources are available. We are hoping that this is a transition year where we can restore some of the resources lost in the previous three years, while addressing some current and future needs. In the prior sections of this document, we outlined for you where we have been as a district and where we want to go. Student performance has remained strong despite three years of little to no growth in funding for our schools. However, we are beginning to see the impact of the loss of curriculum, professional development, technology, and support staff over the last three years. The school district has lost almost 35 positions over the last three years and, for the most part, we have been able to keep the impact away from the classroom as much as possible. But the real reason for our continued success in light of limited funding is the commitment of our staff to our students and our mission and the strong support of our parents and community organizations. Most agree that surviving fiscal year 2012 has been a challenge but many are also optimistic about the future. This Fiscal Year 2013 Superintendent's Recommended Budget was developed in consideration of the challenge but also of the optimism for the future. The Superintendent's Recommended Budget shows an increase of 2.9 %, which allows our district to restore some of the support staff and instructional supplies while addressing some of the critical needs in behavioral health, health education, technology replacement, and professional development, and curriculum work. Although this increase is above the 2% amount recommended at the Financial Forum, we feel that it would be disingenuous to not recommend a budget that addresses the critical needs in our school district. This is not an increase that we take lightly, as a significant amount of deliberation occurred with administrators and staff on what we felt was needed to address the critical issues that face our students today while investing in their future. As we developed our budget, the priorities listed below were used to guide our decisions. It is our overarching goal to preserve the integrity, stability, quality, and culture of our school district. This priority list, which is in no particular order, was developed with input from our administrators and is consistent with the strategic objectives and initiatives described in the Reading Public Schools Strategy for Improvement of Student Outcomes. The Superintendent's FY 13 Recommended Budget ensures sufficient resources to adequately support the following priority areas: • Behavioral Health of all of our students • Growth and development of our staff • Low class sizes (18 -22) in grades K -2 where possible • Middle school interdisciplinary model 21" Century learning initiatives • Technology infrastructure • Maintenance of our school facilities while controlling the long term cost of operating those facilities • Regular day programs (e.g. art, music, physical education; health education, foreign language) 741110-,e 215 Appendix D: Superintendent's Budget Questions & Responses FY2013 Budget Questions /Comments 1. Refresh my memory. When was the last time we increased the RISE.Tuition and how does it compare to other preschools? I noticed that enrollment continues to grow and we are now using space at Wood End. What is the reason for this increase? RISE Tuition was increased 25% in 2007 -08 and then another 20% in 2008 -09. There has not been a tuition increase since FY09. With respect to how we compare to other preschools, as the table below shows, we are at the higher end when compared to other area public pre- schools but in the middle to lower - middle when compared to the local private pre- schools. 2011 Pre - School Tuition Rates Public RATE Woburn Preschool $5.64 Stoneham Preschool $5.64 North Reading Preschool $_6.41 „Readmggreschool.„;� -„ ,$6;75 >. Lynnfield Preschool $8.55 Private Little Treasures $5.37 Goddard $6.94 ReadingPreschool a,� < - $6;757 Christian Cooperative $7.99 Humpty Dumpty $8.13 Sawyer Preschool $9.11 We cannot know for certain why enrollment is growing but we can speculate that it is a combination of demographic trends (more pre - school age children born or parents of pre- school children moving into town), the number of options that our pre - school offers to parents, price, and, most importantly, the quality of the program. 2. What is the status of the waiver applied for by the MA DESE for flexibility from NCLB regulations? The Massachusetts DESE is awaiting word on whether or not the waiver has been approved. Several states have applied for a waiver for certain parts of the current law. If the state receives the waiver, it will not have a budgetary impact, because the waiver is not related to our work with the Common Core or New Teacher Evaluation System. 751Pagc 216 3. Can we get the data outlined in Table 2.16 for 2009 -10 and 2008 -09? The data is below. The SGP data was not collected by the state in 2008 -09. SGP by Schools 2009 ELA 2009 Math 2010 ELA 2010 Math Barrows 34 45 36 51 Birch Meadow 61 61 67 54 Joshua Eaton 50 74 58 54 Killam 42.5 69 52 58 Wood End 44 70 50 61 Coolidge 61 69 72 57 Parker 52 60 63 58 RMHS 47 24 40 34 4. How many years of transition are we allowed for Common Core? The state has allowed for a 3 year transition period. This time frame began in January of 2011 when the new MA Curriculum Frameworks that incorporate the Common Core State States were formally adopted. The MA DESE has stated that there is an expectation for near full implementation for both ELA and Math in the 2012 -2013 school year with full implementation of the new standards in the 2013 -2014 school year. The MCAS testing for 2013 will be based the new MA Curriculum Frameworks /Common Core standards (2011) in the area of ELA. There will still be some overlap with the 200012004 Mathematics Frameworks in the area of Math for 2013 MCAS. In 2014, all state assessments will be based on the 2041 Frameworks and Common Core. 5. Can we get an update on how the new substitute program is working? Currently, we have 173 substitutes working for Reading Public Schools including 113 teacher substitutes and 55 paraeducator substitutes. Sixty-one percent of our teacher substitutes hold Massachusetts teacher certifications. Fifty out of our 113 teacher substitutes formerly worked for us through Kelly Educational Services. 100.0% 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% September October _ November December ■Insourced ■ Outsourced 217 76111 auc As the chart indicates, our fill rates have been very close to the fill rates achieved when we utilized Kelly Services. This chart shows the fill rates for the first four months of the current year as compared to the same four months in the prior year when we were utilizing Kelly. It should also be noted that the rates for Reading Public Schools include the filling ofparaeducator and nurse absences. Those figures are not included in Kelly's fill rates. Summary and Administration 1. Table 3.1 General Fund Summary on page 21 notes a 6.3% or $53,829 increase in Administration yet the narratives on pages 23 and 26 note an increase of 5.1% or $43,065. Please explain the discrepancy. Table 3.1 is correct. However, Table 4.1 is incorrect. We discovered this last week and, as a result, provided the School Committee with a revised Table 4.1 last Thursday. The text has not been updated to reflect the accurate figure which is 6.3% or $53,829. 2. Under Accommodated Costs Why a 6.8% increase in transportation? Our actual spending in FYI was $896,589, not including the additional $24,000 in parent reimbursement. This year we budgeted $850, 000 which does not reflect the additional students that went out of district this year (three students to date). We are projecting another 8 to 10 out of districts placements next year each with a projected cost of approximately $5, 000 for an overall increase of $70, 000 for this year's budget of $920,000 which is still below previous years'spending. 3. Has there been any consideration to decreasing the amount of the district's subsidy for non - mandatory transportation? The only way to decrease the amount that we are subsidizing for transportation would be to increase the transportation fee. We increased the user fee in FY2011 by 30% (from $280 to $365). We did see a drop in participation as a result of the fee increase. Another increase would likely result in an additional drop in participation which, if significant enough, might offset the fee increase for the remaining riders. 4. What would be the cost to include the 7`h grade class and the 2012 -13 8`h grade class with the understanding that we would revert back to 7th grade only in 2013 -14 for the new Health Education Curriculum. At this point we do not know whether health education will be in Grade 6, 7 or 8 for next year. It will depend on several factors, including where it developmentally should be taught and availability of time in the middle school schedule. To teach health education in more than one grade next year will require double the staffing (up to 2.0 FTE Health Education Teachers) and an additional amount offunding for materials and training. Potentially, it could cost an additional $100,0004110, 000 to teach it in more than one grade. 5. , How much was the METCO grant reduced? 771P'igc 219 At this point, we do not know if the METCO grant will be reduced because the funding for the grant will be in the State FY13 budget. Each year, for the last three years, there has been an attempt to reduce the METCO grant at the state level, although at the end it has been level funded. We are anticipating a decrease in grant funding and will adjust accordingly if the grant is increased or level funded. 6. How do future Full Day K costs look by increasing the use of the revolving for 2013 budget balancing? For the last three years, we have ended the year with a balance of between $450,000 and $475, 000 in the FDK revolving fund, despite the fact that our budget offsets have been increasing each year. Those budget offset amounts, however, have been keeping pace with actual revenues. In fact, this year we anticipate revenue to be very close to the projected budget offset of $620,000. Based on current enrollment projections, we anticipate FDK tuition receipts next year to be around $575, 000. Therefore, with the budget offset at $820, 000, we will be drawing the fund balance down to around $230,000. If we have the need to keep the offset at $820, 000 for the following year (FY14), we would project the fund balance would be completely eliminated Therefore, in FY15, we would have to either (a) reduce the offset to a level consistent with the revenue we would project to receive in FY15 (around $600, 000), which would result in a S220,00 0 decrease in our budget or (b) increase the FDK tuition. The increase necessary to generate an additional $200, 000 in FDK revenue based on current FDK enrollments would have to be approximately $1,200 per student per year. 7. How many hours are estimated that the proposed Suspension Coordinator be in actual suspensions versus other duties? Who is currently providing coverage when teachers are in team meetings? Based on historical suspension numbers over the last three years, we anticipate that the Suspension Coordinator will be needed for approximately 40 -50% of the total school day to supervise students who are suspended. The remainder of the time will be used to provide coverage for teachers to attend IEP meetings, which we are currently not addressing adequately. We currently provide coverage in a variety of ways for teachers to attend special education meetings. Unfortunately, with reductions in paraeducaior hours over the last few years, it is difficult to provide that coverage and there are times that we are notable to provide coverage for a teacher to attend an IEP meeting. In our most recent Coordinated Program Review, we were cited and corrective action was required for our failure to have General Education staff attend each IEP meeting. 8. Explain the decrease in transportation on page 36. Providing transportation to mandatory students at Killam, Parker, and Coolidge as well as non - mandatory students at Wood End required three buses. With the elimination of transportation to Wood End, we only require two buses each day which has resulted in a decrease in transportation costs. 7811'a_c 219 9. Don't we already have the Ed Jobs funding? Why are we increasing by $97,000 if we already have this funding (page 24)? In the current year's budget (FY2012), we are funding $414,707 in positions. The salaries for all of those positions have been shifted back to the operating budget in FY2013. We have $236,253 remaining in EdJobs for 2013 that will be used to pay teachers a one -time payment of $600 per FTE as negotiated in the collective bargaining process. This one -time payment is different than the additional competency stipend that was also negotiated. The additional competency stipend is a 5500 amount that is paid to teachers who have achieved certain additional competencies such as dual certification in the subject area they teach and special education. The column movements and additional competency stipends were intended to be paid from the operating budget, not EdJobs. 10. The significant increase in Professional Development is outlined on pages 34 and 35. Please provide a dollar breakdown by initiative. Elementary Open Circle Training 10,000 Writing Curriculum Development 6,660 Report Card Committee 1,332 Common Assessment Development 8,880 Middle Math Curriculum Work (Common Core) 8,880 Common Assessment Development 6,660 Science Curriculum Investigation 2,664 High School Math Curriculum Work (Common Core) 8,880 Common Assessment Development 8,325 . Districtwide Consortium and Collaborative Dues 8,860 Expanding the Boundaries Materials 2,500 National Institute for School Leadership 1,500 Bullying Prevention Training 3,500 ArtsFest 4,500 District Safety Committee 4,440 Behavioral Health Committee 3,330 Technology Committee (BYOD) 8,325 Teacher Technology Training 3,500 11. Can we expect to see funding requests for middle school science in FY 2014 (page 39)? The funding in the Recommended FY13 budget is for teachers and the Assistant Superintendent to research and investigate a scope and sequence and new curriculum material for the 2013 -14 school year. Based upon those recommendations, an amount of funding will be recommended in the FY14 budget. 12. How will be the student and teacher performance be measured in the junior class special project (page39)? I would like to see more detail (when available) on this initiative. 7911''a�r 220 At the February 13 School Committee meeting, the high school administration and staff will be doing a presentation on the Junior Class Real World Project Initiative. At that time, the student performance piece will be presented. 13. The Instructional Technology line is up significantly. I have read the narrative, but I would like a discussion on how we got here all of sudden with all of the funding, grants etc... that have been toward technology in recent years. Over the last three years, we have used Federal Stimulus funding and PTO funding in some schools to purchase additional student computers, SMART Boards and to upgrade our infrastructure ofservers and network across the district. What we have not done is replace computers, particularly those computers that were purchased with building project funds in the Wood End, Barrows, and RMHS building projects. We currently do not have aline item in the budget each year for replenishment of technology. We need to begin to have a replenishment cycle of six years so that our technology does not break down. We are beginning to see the building project computers breaking down and becoming obsolete. 14. Given our focus on behavioral health, have we investigated the team teaching approaching in Grade 9 at the high school? If we implement that model, I feel that it could reduce the other staffing requests that are in the FY 13 budget. You will notice on page 4 in the budget book that "Implement high school best practices which include a redesigned freshman year, senior projects, project -based learning, a redefined schedule, and implementation of MASS Core graduation requirements" is in the plans as described in the Reading Public Schools Strategy for Improvement of Student Outcomes. At this point, a committee has not yet been established to discuss how this would work, because there are different models that exist out there for a Freshman Academy type model. The minimum that we would need to implement this model would bean additional 5.0 FTE teachers, or approximately $250,000, which essentially is one teacher for each of the five core subject areas. The goal is to research the different models that exist, visit schools that have implemented the model, and develop a proposal for the FYI budget. This proposal would coincide with the large freshmen class that would be entering the high school for the 2013 -14 school year. 15. As transportation costs rise, have we considered purchasing our own mid -size busses, which could be used by both the district and the town? It would seem that a small number of such vehicles would decrease the cost over the long run. We have looked at this alternative a number of times and each time our analysis shows that the cost to "in- source " transportation would be prohibitive. More and more districts across the state are outsourcing transportation. In order for transportation to be provided by the district, we would have to procure two mid -size buses, pay drivers at a rate comparable to prevailing wage (since that is what private vendors must pay), fuel costs, insurance, and vehicle maintenance. We would also need to hire a part -time 80 111 a 221 transportation coordinator to handle all of the internal logistics (routing, scheduling, reporting, substitute drivers, etc.). In addition, the buses would need to be replaced every seven years. Smaller buses would also limit our ability to generate revenue by providing transportation to non - mandatory riders. We are not aware of the town having a need for regular bus transportation. The van that is operated by Elder Services could not be replaced with a standard school bus given the special needs of the elderly population served by that van. 16. What is the rationale for keeping the grade 8 to grade 9 enrollment figures unchanged? (Page 7) Historically, as the narrative explains, 87.3% of our eighth graders transition to the high school. This is not reflected in the projected ninth grade enrollment figures for 2012 - 2015. It has been our practice to present enrollment projections based on rolling forward our current enrollment to the next year. We have noway of knowing or projecting how many "students we will lose between the two grades and the number has varied widely historically. 17. Is it.time to reevaluate the locations of our elementary special education program locations due to the discrepancy across the district? (Page 15). Because of costs and space limitations, we have only had one of each type of special education program at each level. Currently, we have programs at all five of our elementary schools and we have one RISE preschool session at Wood End. Next year, the LLD program that is currently at Birch Meadow will be shifted to Joshua Eaton. That should serve to balance the numbers somewhat. 18. A comment only as unfunded mandates continue to impact our budget — "Curriculum and professional development expenses have been increased by $120,000 in order to provide adequate funding for work that needs to be done to align our curriculum to the common core develop common assessments to be used as part of the new teacher evaluation system and provide bullying prevention training to staff." (page 24) 19. Where is the $25,000 savings from in house management of substitute teachers reflected? In the regular day budget, Table 4.5, under Teacher Substitutes, you will see that amount budgeted for FY2013 is $32, 677 lower than the FY2012 budget. 20. The technology work order ticket system has identified the "inadequacy of current staffing levels." (Page 25). What additional creative ways are we considering to address this need? How can we use students to handle technical issues? Our goals include preparing our students for their futures. This appears to be one way to address this goal — provide students with skills training, and provide opportunities to apply these skills, complete community service, and fill leadership roles. We agree that we would like to get students more involved in providing a student help desk for technology support and we have done it on a more informal scale, however, we do not have the staffing at this time to plan, implement, and supervise such a project. 81JPa -;e 222 There are also some logistical issues involved with students providing technology support including maintaining security of the network and access of support at elementary and middle schools. 21.' What has caused the District Administration Telecomm line to decrease by 9.5 %? As stated in the budget narrative, the figure used for FY2013 is more reflective of our three prior years of actual history. Most of the savings that we have seen is from upgrading our phone systems and migrating away from multiple individual lines to trunk lines with direct inward dialing. 22. Why are we increasing the cost of Textbooks and Consumables by 25 %? How is this line category different from Instructional Supplies and Curriculum Materials? The increases that you are seeing in most of the Supply and Material lines of the regular day budget are reflecting the restoration of the $100, 000 to the building expense budgets (also known as the "per pupil'). This funding is provided to the building principals to allocate for instructional supplies, instructional materials (textbooks, consumables, etc.), instructional equipment, and instructional technology. You will see that instructional supplies also increase by 22.9% and technology supplies by 37..2 %. The textbook and consumables line represents the costs of annual replacement of instructional materials such as Wordly Wise and Fundations consumables, Everyday math journals and home links, guided reading materials, History alive materials, and assessment materials. For FY2013, there are some additional expenses for a variety of initiatives such as writing at the elementary school or new AP courses at the High School. In addition, replacement texts are also funded from this line. Instructional supplies consist of items such as paper, pens and pencils, staples, toner, art supplies, rulers, science supplies, batteries, etc. Curriculum materials are materials that are purchased at the district level for new curriculum initiatives or to supplement or expand existing initiatives. 23. What specifically are we added under Technology Supplies, Software Licenses and Instructional Technology categories? (Page 36). On page 40, it lists "some of the upgrades and perceived needs for technology." Aren't these tools we already have in the district? What specific hardware and software titles will we be adding? The increase in technology supplies, as mentioned above, reflects the allocation by the building administrators of the restored $100, 000 in building per pupil budgets. One of the expenses that has been increasing over time in this area is the cost of replacement bulbs for smart board projectors. Expenses for memory and other components necessary to replace or upgrade computers have also been on the rise. The most significant expense attributable to software licenses is the cost of the filtering software license. This is a three year license which expires at the end of the year. The cost for the license for the next three years is projected to be $28, 000. In addition, we 821 Page 223 are incurring additional costs as a result of the new elementary report cards and the use of the AP Web teacher interface offered through Rediker, our student information management system. We also have an additional cost for a data analysis tool that replaces Test Wiz but offers far greater data analysis, benchmarking (not just between buildings, but between other districts in Massachusetts and nationally), action planning, and research tools. The increase in Instructional Technology reflects the technology replacement initiative discussed within the budget narrative. We have a significant number of computers that are 6 years old or older and will be in need of replacement. Many of these computers were purchased as part of the RMHS, Wood End, and Barrows building projects. Special Education 1. What is the percentage of students with disabilities statewide 2011 -12 (Table 4.8)? That information is not available and would not be available until next year when the student information data is submitted by all districts and collected by DESE. 2. Is there anything in particular that we can attribute the increase from 16.3% to 17.6% (10 -11 / 11 -12) for percentage of students with disabilities (Table 4.8)? The figures in Table 4.8 for 2010 -11 are incorrect. The actual number of students is 796 representing a total percentage of 17.6 %, which is unchanged in the current year. In general, we believe we are and will be seeing an increased demand from families that results from our district's reputation for high quality special education programs which can result in more families tending to move in. Also, as we further develop and expand our programs we attract more families to the community. To date we have received at least 10 inquiries from families looking to move to Reading and wanting to know about our special education services. 3. How much has the DLC program grown? The numbers have varied over the years. The program has existed for over 15 years though started as more of a se f contained program of only a few kids, not necessarily all students with autism. It then became an inclusive program of three kids in first grade and each year grew from that point. For quite a few years, there was only one DLC teacher at Barrows overseeing the program, but when the program went to six grades the age range was too great and we had to hire 2 teachers with paraeducator support in all grades. We had between 8 -10 kids per year historically until around 2005 when the numbers increased in all grades. In 2009 we created the DLC2, the sub - separate classroom, which began with two students and there are now five students. Last year, there were 27 students in DLCI and three in DLC2. This year we moved to a model of co- teaching with a DLC teacher at each grade level, there are five DLC 2 students and 24 — 27 in DLCI. In addition, as the numbers increased and students transitioned to middle school and then to high school, we have added DLC programs at both Coolidge and the High School as well. The increase in the number of students in this program is not surprising considering that there has been a 400% increase in the number of children diagnosed with autism over the last decade. 831Pag,e 224 4. The narrative notes that the "Circuit Breaker" was 40% in the prior year. Refresh my memory. Didn't it end up back at 60 -65% when all was said and done? In FY2011, Circuit Breaker was funded at 40 %. In FY12, we began the budget process assuming 40% but late in the budget process, the legislature's budget included additional funding to bring that up an amount that is closer to 65% for the current year. 5. How many in- district programs do we currently have and what is the plan to add more programs in the future? We currently have the: DLC - Developmental Learning Center (students identified with autism spectrum disorders) ILP — Integrated Learning Program (students identified with developmental delays, health impairments, intellectual impairments, and physical impairments) LLD — Language Learning Differences (students identified with language -based learning disabilities and other specific learning disabilities) SSP — Social Support Program (students identified with social and emotional disabilities) TSP — Therapeutic Support Program (sub- separate program for high school students identified with emotional impairment) We have added the TSP for this year, but you will see this program described in the budget booklet as a new program for next year. At this point, our focus will be on enhancing our current in- district programming through research -based best practices. 6. Is the therapeutic program mentioned in the narrative (page 45 and 46) the program we funded for the remainder of the FY2012 budget? Yes. 7. Do we know the level of the increases that Landmark and Learning Prep have petitioned for? Boston Higashi (365 day residential) — increased by $25,344.67 (effective 1112) Landmark (day program) —10.7 % ($4,584.18 1year) Learning Prep (day program) — 22.5% ($7, 310.88 1year) 8. Why is Contract Services Category — Testing & Evaluation down 69.2 %? We moved 45 day placement costs to our tuition line. We are also making efforts to ensure .that our evaluations completed by in- district staff are comprehensive and thorough in order to reduce requests for independent evaluations. We have sought rulings from the Bureau of Special Education Appeals (BSEA) to prevent us from having to pay for independent evaluations at the parent /guardian's request. 84111agc 225 9. Why is Contract Services Category — Tutoring Services up 44 %? - This projection is based on current year spending. Each time one of our students is hospitalized we need to provide access to the general curriculum and provide tutoring services, which is usually provided through a contract with a provider at the hospital, typically at a rate of $301hr. Our cost center covers ALL students, whether they receive special education services or not. So a student who has had major surgery and is out for several weeks, we will provide tutoring services to the student either in their home or the hospital. We also have at least two students this year, who were removed from their current out of district program for failure to comply with the program and/or attend. While we looked for another program that would suit their needs AND accept them, we are required to provide educational services and we've done so through tutoring. 10. I realize it is a small amount, but I am curious as to what the additional compensation line is in the Other Salaries Category? There is also a line for the in the Professional Salaries Category. Additional compensation includes both longevity and sick leave buyback. 11. I understand the increase in legal counsel. Are these services we are able to bid every few years or does the counsel vary on a case by case basis? I do not believe that this is something that we have competitively solicited in the past. Legal services are exempt from Chapter 30B, the Massachusetts Uniform Procurement Act (public bidding laws). That does not mean that we cannot solicit competitive quotes in the future if we choose. As an aside, we currently pay $215 per hour for these services which is far below the average rate of $300 per hour that districts are paying for special education legal services. ' 12. As the number of students in out of district placements increases, what leaming profiles do we additionally need to target to support our students within the district? We are developing a Student Support Program at the High School. Are there additional programs we need to create to meet the needs of our students within the district? See response to Question 5 13. When our Special Education department. last presented, it was noted that our out -of- district per pupil expenses were near the top of the state, well above the state average. What is our current per pupil expense for out of district placements? The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education does not track out -of- district special education per pupil expenses; rather, they only track out -of- district tuitions per pupil expenses for all students. This out -of- district tuition figure that the state tracks includes tuitions that districts pay for students who participate in school choice (which is capped at $5, 000 per year) as well as charter schools. These tuitions are low compared to special education out -of- district tuitions. All but two of our out -of- district tuitions are special education tuitions at a cost anywhere between $20, 000 and $300,000 per year. We only have 85111age 226 two regular education students out of district at the Greenfield virtual school at a cost of $5, 000 per year. Many other communities have far more students in these lower cost regular day placements which keeps their cost per pupil down when compared to ours which is 97% special education. 14. What is included under "Therapeutic Services ?" Why is this number increasing slightly if we are adding additional therapeutic staff (OT, SLP)? This $700 increase represents a 1.4% increase in spending. We've added a slide to explain who are contract providers are and what services they offer. These cover services we do not provide through in- district personnel — hearing, vision, & mobility. Many times we also have to pay for services that are not provided at the out of district placement, as well as related therapies that we have to cover over the summer months. 15. Why are two Team Chairperson positions being added to the administration salary line item and not to teachers and specialists? We employ the same number of team chairs that we always have. It's not that we are adding Team Chair positions. Rather, the federal IDEA grant had previously covered the cost of four team chairs and due to the fact that grant funding has remained relatively flat while salaries have increased over the past two years, the grant funds are no longer sufficient to cover these positions and they had to be shifted back to the operating budget. 16. Please detail the additional increase in the Behavioral Health Services line item. This seems more than the positions described in the narrative. Included in this line are the salaries for the 1.0 Behavioral Health Coordinator, the 1.5 FTE Social Worker positions requested to be added in FYI and the 1.0 Districtwide evaluator position requested to be added. It also includes the reclassification of a school psychologist position from regular day to special education. In FY12, the Coolidge Middle school restructured a special education teaching position to an adjustment counsel /social worker position to address behavioral health needs ofstudents in their special education programs. This salary is currently reflected in the regular day budget but should really be reflected in the special education budget given the nature of the position. 17. Have we explored ways to reduce transportation costs such as regionalization? Please describe. We do currently participate in a regional networkfor special education transportation that is managed by the SEEM collaborative. The collaborative coordinates transportation such that students from member communities who are attending the same schools are transported together on the same bus. This has helped us in relatively stable costs for transportation with total expenditure fluctuations driven more by the number of students than the cost per bus. 18. What software licenses are included under this line item? Why has this line item increased by 30.9% 861Pay, c 227 We pay for our Semstracker license under this line. The —$4600 price increase is due to adding modules to our software package. We will now be able to create uniform documents, as well as track and store in one place all 504s, ELL, Gifted/Talented, Hospital /Homebound, Response to Intervention (all tiers), BullyTracker, as well as district- specific programs. 19. In the past, we have had students from other districts enrolled in our special education programs. It appears there aren't any students from other districts in our schools. What is the status of this? We currently have five students from other districts attending special education programs in our schools and paying us tuition. 20. Please expand on "the least restrictive environment" (p. 42 that we provide for our special education students so that our stakeholders understand the challenge. I.e. time, monies, and collective energy expended upon projects like Killam School —2011. The Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) is a legal standard outlined in the federal regulations set forth in IDEA. The LRE demands to the maximum extent appropriate we educate students with disabilities with students who do not have disabilities. This is generally understood to mean mainstreaming or inclusion opportunities by most laypeople, however the placement must still allow the student to effectively progress in the general education curriculum (with special education and related services to meet the students individual needs). So to that extent, student may be "pulled out "for services or a specialist may "push in" to the classroom to deliver services. For a student whose individual needs exceed this type of service delivery they may receive services in a "substantially separate " placement, meaning they are still in our schools, but the majority of their day is spent outside the general education classroom. These programs tend to, have higher teacher:student ratios and students receive multiple related services. 21. Clarify the "72% administration salary line" (p.42) and its impact on this and other aspects of the budget. See response to Question 15. 22. "Personnel expenses for staffing ...are partially offset by revenues such as tuition" (p. 42) reflects that the District absorbs the remainder of expenses. What is the amount and how has it impacted the Spec. Ed. budget? Revenues from pre- school tuitions and special education tuitions that other districts pay to us for placing their students in our programs will provide an offset next year of $540, 000. This represents approximately I1 % of the professional salary expenses related to special education. 23. Explain in layman's terms the hardship that 7 "out of district placements" (p.43) have had upon the District's Special Ed budget. "Tuition and transportation" are necessary in each case as is staffing so this is not only a challenge but a sacrifice made by the community at large. Do the resultant pressures extend beyond Special Education and how? 87111 age 228 The figures we used to present the Therapeutic Support Program highlight this hardship. Using a conservative tuition projection (publicly funded day programs —SEEM, NEC) 7 students at a rate of $37,500 for each student highlights this cost already ($262,500). Transportation to SEEM Collaborative is relatively low at $600 1mos. for each student (depending on the number of students on that run) and assuming they don't require summer services is another $6000 %a. student ($42,000 total transportation for 7 students). We should also consider the legal fees we would extend to try to reach a legal agreement with the families so the district did not absorb the entire cost of the program. 24. Evolving from # 4; show that the addition of 2.5 LICS Ws impacts the total budget elsewhere; perhaps regular day. Could the targeted "interventions" be more effective? The .5 LICSW is intended to be a district -wide position. While it is funded through the special education cost center, the expectation is that this individual would be deployed to district -wide to provide crisis intervention and manage the most complex and time consuming cases. . Have two LICSW on staff will also be a benefit to the larger school community as they will be available to consult on other student cases through TST, Child Study, and CASE conferences. Health Services 1. What is the Other Salaries Category? Other Salaries represents the cost of nurse substitutes who provide coverage for nurses who are absent. Athletics 1. When we say an increase in revolving fund support is not a sustainable solution, when do we mean? Can we do it again next year or is it a one year solution? We envision this would be a two year solution. Based on our projections, we could do this it FY13 and in FY14 but in FYI 5, we would need to reduce the offset back to a level that represents what we actually receive in a given year. This would result in a funding gap that would need to be made up by either increasing the amount of funding to the Athletics budget, or increasing revenue (i.e., user fees) or some combination of the two. 2. Why were coaching salaries charged to the EdJobs grant? This was a planned and eligible expense under the EdJobs grant and was discussed during last year's budget process. 3. Increases in participation are actually flat due to a decrease in football offsetting increase in hockey. Why then a need to increase the equipment maintenance line? The data in Table 4.14 shows historical participation and does not reflect this year's participation. We are projecting an increase in participation in FY2013. . 88 1 1' , :, (. 229 4. Are the participation levels for Girls Ice Hockey correct (Table 4.14)? There doesn't seem to be an increase for the addition of the JV program. The figures that you see are for FY2011. The increase in the number of students participating in Girl's Hockey overall has increased from 24 last year to 27 this year. 5. Why are we letting student athletes participate when they need a special helmet due to a concussion? It would seem to me that when it gets to a point where we need to purchase a special helmet it may make better sense to have the student athlete stay out of competition. These helmets are purchased for student athletes who are returning post - concussion with full clearance by the doctor. This special equipment provides an extra measure of protection for those athletes. 6. How many home football games will we have in the fall of 2012? We lost out on revenue in 2011 due to the small number of home games. The budget was developed with the assumption that there will be 7 home games next year. 7. How do our coaches' salaries compare to surrounding districts? We are above the average for communities in the Middlesex league and above the median for most districts in the Middlesex League. The table below shows the comparison to just a few of the Middlesex League districts. Position Belmont Wakefield Stoneham Wilmington Woburn Average Median Reading RPS v. Avg BPS v. Med Football (Head) 10,200 9,142 11,629 7,731 11,903 10,161 10,200 . '12,248 2,067 2,048 Field Hockey 5,308 4,768 6,033 - : 41346 5,745 51240 51308 ';.,',6;560 1,320 1,252 Soccer 5,308 5,074 6,033 4,346 5,745 5,301 5,308 6,560 1,259 1,252 Volleyball 5,308 6,033 4,346 5,229 5,308 '6,560 ' 1,331 1,252 Cross - Country 5,467 3,765 5,160 4,346 4,541 4,656 4,541 6,560 1,904 2,019 Basketball 6,826 6,875 7,367 4,346 6,989 6,481 6,875 6,560 79 (315) Hockey 6,826 6,196 7,367 4,346 6,989 6,345 6,826 6,560 215 (266) Swimming 4,585 3,377 6,033 5,745 4,935 5,165 6,560 1,625 1,395 Indoor Track 4,585 4,663 6,033 .4,346 6,002 5,126 4,663 6,560 1,434 1,897 Wrestling 4,585 4,663 4,346 6,002 4,899 4,624 6,560 1,661 1,936 Baseball 5,467 5,353 6,033 4,346 6,989 5,638 5,467 6,560 922 1,093 Softball 5,467 5,353 6,033 4,346 6,989 5,638 5,467 6,560 922 1,093 Lacrosse 5,467 5,353 4,346 5,745 5,228 5,410 6,560 1,332 1,150 Tennis 5,467 3,640 4,706 4,346 4,541 4,540 4,541 6,560 2,020 2,019 Outdoor Track 4,585 5,183 6,033 4,346 6,002 5,230 5,183 6,560 1,330 1,377 Extracurricular Activities 1. Since 2009 this budgeted item has decreased over $50,000. Is this the area where, given recent initiatives on Behavioral Health, invigorated planning for post school -day activities should be placed? The overall level of spending on extracurricular activities has actually not decreased appreciably over the last several years; rather, an increasing amount of the expense has been offset by revolving fee revenues. In FY09, there were no offsets from revolving fund 891Pagc 230 revenues and in FYI there is an offset of $42, 000. That difference accounts for the majority of the apparent $50,000 decrease to this budget. Networking and Technology Maintenance 1. Why is the telephone repairs budget up 17.4% We have two school's phone systems that have come off or are coming off of warranties. We have now had to add them to our maintenance contract which has increased the cost of that contract. 2. How can we address the district wide need for timely completion of technology work order more creatively and in a cost effective manner? The narrative supports the use of student technology support teams for routine issues that interfere with instructional time, such as upgrading (iOS device) software. The use of students to handle routine technology issues which do not require highly specialized skills offers our students community service, leadership positions and the opportunity to explore vocational interests for their futures. As we mentioned at the January 9h meeting, we are proposing adding 1.5 FTE technicians to the technology staffing for next year. This will bring us up to respectable, but not optimal level for the maintenance of technology and will allow us to continue to move forward in some of our technology driven initiatives. To use student technology teams is an excellent idea and one that we advocate for, but it requires supervision, planning, and training. We do not currently have the staffing level to provide that supervision, planning, and training. We have had experiences in the past where students who were not supervised were able to access our network and maliciously corrupt our network. Your reference to the iOS device, which transpired at the last meeting needs to be clarified: The iOS software was not updated because of lack of staffing, rather because our older wireless access points at our elementary schools do not support the iOS 5 software. Therefore, if we upgraded the software on the administrator's it ad,. they would not have been able to use them because of lack of wireless connectivity. In the Capital budget, there is $75, 000 allocated to upgrade our wireless and to provide 100% wireless coverage in every school in the district. In conversations that I have had with Janet Dee, the Instructional Technology Specialist at the high school, we will be using students for our BYOD pilot in helping teachers and students with the applications associated with coordinating a BYOD class. We feel that students can provide greater benefit to students and teachers in this manner than in providing service to computers. School Building Maintenance 1. Last year I was told that there was going to be a discussion about increasing the $25,000 in revenue we receive from Reading Recreation. Nothing has been done and data shows that we are $155.70 (per event) below market value. This is a significant amount of lost revenue. Please provide some thoughts on this. 901Pa'r 231 The agreement for rental offacilities is an agreement between the School Committee and the Recreation Department. The amount of $25, 000 was agreed upon several years ago. We can certainly have a discussion with the Town Manager and the Recreation Department about increasing the amount. However, it should be noted that we currently do not pay the Town of Reading for any use of outdoor fields that are under the direction of the Recreation Department. 2. Are we seeing any extra wear and tear from all of this extra use of our facilities? How are we accounting for the potential capital expense associated with extra wear and tear? As various pieces of equipment requires repair or replacement (e.g. basketball nets, gym floors, scoreboards, auditorium a/v components, etc.) or areas of the building require extra work (e.g. painting, carpet cleaning, floor refinishing, etc.), if those expenses are attributable in part to facility rental use, we will often charge some or all of those expenses to the revolving fund. With respect to the capital plan, we are always balancing projected life expectancy with actual use and planning our capital replacements with both in mind. 3. What are Other Services in the Contract Services Category? Included in this category are pest management, environmental testing, sewer /drain clearing, boiler water treatment services, and paging services. _ 4. Why is Wood End's water and electricity consumption always higher than the other elementary schools (Tables 4.22 and 4.23)? The charts are actually showing consumption per square foot as opposed to consumption. Wood End's electricity consumption is actually just slightly higher than the elementary schools and their consumption per square foot is higher. This has to do with the fact that, as a new school, they have more fans, pumps, and motors operating to meeting code for air exchanges and other environmental measures. With more equipment per square foot, we .would expect to see more consumption per square foot. With respect to water consumption, the field in front of Wood End has a water sprinkler system and the water comes from the building and is metered at the building. This is the only field adjacent to a school that is has sprinklers and is watered regularly. Town Buildine Maintenance 1. Why is overtime projected at flat when actual for 2011 was $32,197 (Table 4.24)? Where is it running halfway through the current year? As of the end of December, the budget was a little over 25% expended. This is low when compared to other years as this has been a very mild winter with virtually no snowfall. As with school building maintenance, we tend to budget overtime based on the highest amount expended over the past three years of actual data. You will see in FYIO, we spent almost $39,000. 91111 .+ c 232 Other Questions 1. I believe last week it was stated that the METCO grant was budgeted down $25,000, but page 63 on has it down $6,795. Please explain. The budget offset was decreased by $25,000. The reason for the offset decrease was twofold. First, we assumed a 2% decreased in METCO grant funding. Second, next year, we will no longer be sharing our elementary METCO bus with Wakefield (they are entering into a contract with Lynnfeld). As a result, our transportation costs will likely increase by approximately $17, 000 per year. These two factors together led us to decrease the revenue offset by $25, 000. 2. How many unanticipated out of district placements did we have in 2012? What are the legal expenses associated with these placements (Page 64 narrative)? We have had five unanticipated placements, two pending placement settlements, and one additional student who moved to Reading this year who is in an out of district placement. With respect to legal expenses, we have paid a little over $35, 000 in legal expenses related to these cases year to date compared to total expenses in FYI of $I8, 000 and $9, 000 in FYI 0. 3. Why are the RISE Pre - School and Use of School Property revolving funds down (page 65)? In the case of RISE; we drew down more in offset than we took received in revenue. This was anticipated. As for the Use of School Property, the table is reporting revenue as of June 30, 2011. In actuality, a number of the rental invoices for rentals that occurred in FYI were not received and posted until July or August. Actual revenues attributable to FYII were closer to 5190, 000. 4. How do our rental fees compare to surrounding communities (Table A2)? Our rental fees are very comparable to those surrounding communities who rent out their facilities and charge rent. Many of our surrounding communities, however, either do not rent out their facilities or do not charge rent for groups to use their buildings. 5. What is the breakdown of facility rentals "For Profit' vs. "Not for Profit "? Data is, unfortunately, not tracked this way in our facility rental system. 92111a-, e 233 N W Public Works - Enterprise Funds FY13 Budget Overview The Board of Selectmen will vote on new water, sewer and storm waters rates at an upcoming hearing prior to Town Meeting. The new rates will be effective with the September 2012 billing. A discussion on rates and reserves follows three sections on the FY13 Enterprise Fund budgets. Water Enterprise Fund Water Supply is responsible for the administrative management, operation, maintenance and security of the drinking water supply in accordance with all Federal, State and local regulations. This division also provides technical support. Water Distribution is responsible for maintaining and operating the municipal water distribution system in accordance with industry standards and all applicable regulations. In addition, this division oversees water meter installation, repair and meter reading.. In total, the gross FY13 Water fund budget increases by 2.3% compared to one year ago, but actually decreases by 2.1% when the November 2011 Town Meeting approved changes for water main work on Howard street are included. Water Fund FY12 FY13 Change Budget Original $5,672,710 $5,802,870 +2.3% Gross Budget $5,922,710 $5,802,870 -2.0% There are no changes in FTEs and wages are increased to reflect a 2% non -union increase or at a level consistent with union contracts. Non -MWRA expenses are funded to adjust to recent trends. Many expenses have been reduced, while the retirement assessment has increased to fund a disability case. One new expense for FY13 is the funding of Other Post Employment Benefits, consistent with the pattern in other funds. Water Fund FY12 FY13 Change Wages $639,490 $656,788 +2.7% Exp non -MWRA) $577,677 $628,290 +8.8% MWRA Expense* $1,759,085 $1,813,825 +3.1% Capital $783,500 $993,000 +26.7% Debt $1,785,591 $1,326,051 -25.7% Other $377,367 $384,916 +2.0% TOTAL $5,922,710 $5,802,870 -2.0% * +2.3% versus final FY12 assessment of $1,772,389 One large capital project for FY13 is $550,000 of repairs to the Auburn Hill water tank. Water main projects for Haverhill and Howard Streets will continue and a new one for the H Street loop (Ivy St.) is added. Debt service declines as old water main debt is repaid in FY12, and no new debt is planned until a $1.0 million water main project for South- West - Gleason in FY16. In FY12 a total of $550,000 of reserves were used to offset some of the costs and keep rates low. See the following discussion on rates and reserves to see policy suggestions for the future. 02/17/2012 09:33 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20132 WATER TC'VVN OF, READING, IV,A TOWN OF READING INEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS FY13 Enterprise Funds 2011 2012 2012 ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 2 -ADNIN PG 1 Ibgnyrpts PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 0450 WATER - OPERATIONS 05 EXPENSES 61005519 519000 MEDICARE 5,793.85 7,500.00 7,500.00 .00 - 7,500.00 7,750.00 3.3% 61005519 519700 RETIREMENT - 26,724.00 27,927.00 27,927.00 27,927.00 27,927.00 73,126.00 161.8% 61005519 519750 OPEB CONTR .00 .00 .01 .00 .00 47,664.00 .0% 61005529 529433 HAZ WST DI 6,025.59 10,000.00 10,000.00 .00 10,000.00 10,000.00 .O% 61005530 530110 LEGAL COUN .00 10,000.00 10,000.00 .00 10,000.00 5,000.00 -50.0% 61005530 530480 PRIMACEY A 5,551.27 5,500.00 5,500.00 5,267.71 5,500.00 5,500.00 .0% 61005530 530491 SVC WKFLD N 7,857.29 7,000.00 7,000.00 4,189.50 7,000.00 8,000.00 14.316 CO 61005531 531000 PRDEV TRN c;l 2,569.52 2,500.00 2,500.00 5,333.00 2,500.00 5,000.00 100.0% 61005574 574000 HEALTH INS 139,748.59 165,000.00 165,000.00 94,602.02 165,000.00 155,000.00 -6.116 61005574 574010 PROP /CASUA 23,017.00 45,000.00 45,000.00 24,001.00 45,000.00 30,000.00 -33.3% 61005574 574550 WC INSURNC 15,411.00 36,000.00 36,000.00 16,234.00 36,000.00 20,000.00 -44.4% TOTAL EXPENSES 232,698.11 316,427.00 316,427.01 177,554.23 316,427.00 367,040.00 16.0% 07 DEBT SERVICE 61007591 591000 DEBT PRINC - 1,375,000.00 1,598,500.00 1,370,000.00 620,000.00 1,598,500.00 958,500.00 - 30.0% 61007591 592000 LTDEBTINT 463,325.00 415,591.00 415,591.00 220,441.25 415,591.00 367,551.00 -11.6% TOTAL DEBT SERVICE 1,838,325.00 2,014,091.00 1,785,591.00 840,441.25 2,014,091.00 1,326,051.00 -25.7% 09 OTHER FINANCING USES 61009596 596111 WAGE -TWNMG 14,896.00 14,896.00 14,896.00 .00 14,696.00 15,194.00 2.0% TOWN ± OF READING -, MA 02/17/2012 09:33 TOWN OF READING PG 2 blelacheur (NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS bgnyrpts . PROJECTION: 20132 FY13 Enterprise Funds FOR PERIOD 99 WATER 2011 2012 2012 2012 2012 2013 PCT ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD ACTUAL PROJECTION 2 -ADMIN CHANGE 61009596 596121 WAGE - ACTNG 10,078.00 10,078.00 10,078.00 .00 10,078.00 10,280.00 2.04 61009596 596122 EXP ACING 180.00 180.00 180.00. .00 180.00 184.00 2.2% 61009596 596131 WAGE -FINCE 32,032.00 32,032.00 32,032.00 .00 32,032.00 32,673.00 2.04 61009596 596132 EXEFINANCE 21,653.00 21,653.00 21,653.00 .00 21,653.00 22,086.00 2.04 61009596 596141 WAGE HR 4,900.00 4,900.00 _ 4,900.00 .00 4,900.00 4,998.00 2.04 61009596 596142 EXP HR - 2,264.00 2,264.00 2,264.00 .00 2,264.00 2,309.00 2.04 61009596 596151 WAGE TECHN 31,777.00 31,777.00 31,777.00 .00 31,777.00 32,413.00 2.096 61009596 596152 EXP TECH 30,418.00 30,418.00 30,418.00 .00 30,418.00 31,026.00 2.04 61009596 596161 WAGEDPWADM 104,690.00 104,690.00 104,690.00 .00 104,690.00 106,784.00 2.04 N 61009596 596171 WAGE ENGIN to 98,407.00, 98,407.00 98,407.00 .00 98,407.00 100,375.00 2.04 C" 61009596 596181 WAGE HGWY 6,730.00 6,730.00 6,730.00 .00 6,730.00 6,865.00 2.04 61009596 596162 EXP HGWY 19,342.00 19,342.00 19,342.00 .00 19,342.00 19,729.00 2.04 61009596 596500 XFERTO ENT ' .00 .00 414,500.00 .00 .00 .00 - 100.0% TOTAL OTHER FINANCING USES - 377,367.00 377,367.00 791,867.00 .00 377,367.00 384,916.00 -51.41 TOTAL. WATER - OPERATIONS 2,448,390.11 2,707,885.00 2,893,885.01 1,017,995.48 2,707,885.00 2,078,007.00 -28.24 0451 WATER - DISTRIBUTION 03 SALARIES - 61013511 511401 SUPERVISOR 38,826.33 39,609.00 39,609.00 24,430.35 39,609.00 40,393.00 2.04 61013511 511403 FOREMAN 58,182.46 59,837.00 59,837.00 38,584.43 59,837.00 61,896.00 3.4% 61013511 511405 WRKNG FRMN 125,585.72 110,842.00 110,842.00 71,852.30 110,842.00 114,576.00 3.44 61013511 511409 EQUIP OPER 122,832.48 141,149.00 141,149.00. 89,421.23 141,149.00 143,571.00 1.74 N W J TC)WN OP RE-ADIN G. iV IA 02/17/2012 09:33 OF READING 3 blelacheui (TOWN NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS IPG bgnyrpts PROJECTION: 20132 FY13 Enterprise Funds FOR PERIOD 99 WATER 2011 2012 2012 2012 2012 2013 PCT ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD ACTUAL PROJECTION 2 -ADMIN CHANGE 61013511 511413 SKLLD LABE. 57,211.78 79,672.00 79,672.00 26,489.77 79,672.00 42,220.00 -47.0% 61013511 511417 LABORER 33,032.16 33,032.00 33,032.00 41,098.15 33,032.00 67,076.00 103.1% 61013511 511471 CLERK(S) 17,268.40 17,598.00 17,598.00 10,599.31 17,598.00 18,640.00 5.9% 61013511 511481 SNOW REMOV .00 - 6,500.00 - 6,500.00 .00 - 6,500.00 - 6,500.00 .0% 61013511 515000 OVERTIME 52,509.30 50,000.00 50,000.00 61,602.81 50,000.00 55,000.00 10.0% 61013511 516050 OUT OF GRA 5,517.60 3,000.00 3,000.00 2,623.44 3,000.00 4,500.00 50.0% 61013511 516060 ONCALL PRM - 10,492.00 8,818.00 8,818.00 6,505.00 8,818.00 _ 10,000.00 13.4% 61013511 516060 LONGEVITY 6,825.00 7,500.00 7,500.00 5,550.00 7,500.00 7,500.00 .0% 61013512 512000 WAGES TEMP 5,303.74 7,192.00 7,192.00 4,865.20 7,192.00 8,000.00 11.296 61013517 517017 SCK IV BBK .00 .00 .00 2,968.64 .00 .00 .0% TOTAL SALARIES ' 533,586.97 551,749.00 551,749.00 386,590.63 551,799.00 566,872.00 2.716 05 EXPENSES 61015521 521301 ELECTRICIT 10,497.81 11,000.00 11,000.00 5,601.54 11,000.00 11,000.00 .0% 61015521 521303 NATRL GAS 301.91 500.00 500.00 177.00 500.00 500.00 .0% 61015521 521392 WRLS PHONE 2,864.58 '. .00 .00 1,908.38 .00 (1,500.00 .0% 61015530'530420 PLCE DTAIL 10,413.62 15,000.00 15,000.00 13,423.81 15,000.00 16,000.00 6.7% 61015530 530470 WTR SYSTEM 1,730.69 10,000.00 10,000.00 1,135.71 10,000.00 10,000.00 .096 61015530 530472 MAIN PIPE/ 760.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 .00 10,000.00 10,000.00 .0% 61015530 530474 SVC PIPE /M 59,001.75 50,000.00 50,000.00 51,611.36 50,000.00 50,000.00 .0% 61015530 530478 CROSS CONN 5,160.00 8,000.00 8,000.00 1,820.00 81000.00 8,000.00 .0% 61015531 531000 PRDEV TRN .00 .00 .00 1,400.00 .00 .00 .0% TOWN OF READING, M 02/17/2012 09:33 (TOWN OF READING blelacheur NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS PROJECTION: 20132 FY13 Enterprise Funds WATER 2011 2012 2012 2012 2012 ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD ACTUAL PROJECTION 03 SALARIES IPG 4 bgnyrpts FOR PERIOD 99 2013 PCT 2 -ADNIN CHANGE 10,000.00 61015536 536000 LIC SFTWR 105,214.94 .00 10,000.00 7,000..00 10,000.00 61015540 540470 WD GEN SUP .00 '27,000.00 24,160.62 61015540 540472 MAIN PIPE -7.4% 33,000.00 23,288.30 33,000.00 61015540 540474 SVC METERS 33,000.00 .00 30,000.00 380.00 -9.1% 61015554 554000 UNFM /CLTH 40,000.00 .00 4,227.97 39,954.45 61015578 578100 LICENSES 5,500.00 .00 5,500.00 347.00 3,621.99 TOTAL EXPENSES 5,500.00 .00 5,500.00 .00 150,134.25 750.00 08 CAPITAL EXPENDITURES N W 61018584 584410 BOBCATLOAD co .0% 44,044.20 61018584 584411 VAN #2 70,000.00 37,933.61 61018584 584418 TRUCK #12 550,000.00 .00 61016585 585451 METRINSTAL .00 .00 177,916.09 .00 61018585 585452 BOOSTER TE .096 .00 .00 .00 61018585 585461 TANK INSP .00 .00. .00 .0% .61018588 568422 H ST LOOP 39,954.45 .00 61018588 588450 SYSTEMS 1,014,499.00 - 92,245.27 TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 1,014,499.00 1,652,122.00 167,648.63 62.9% TOTAL WATER - DISTRIBUTION 851,369.85 0452 WATER - SUPPLY / TREATMENT 03 SALARIES IPG 4 bgnyrpts FOR PERIOD 99 2013 PCT 2 -ADNIN CHANGE 10,000.00 10,000.00 105,214.94 .00 10,000.00 10,000.00 .0% 27,000.00 .00 '27,000.00 8,461.89 27,000.00 25,000.00 -7.4% 33,000.00 .0% 33,000.00 15,288.26 .00 33,000.00 .00 30,000.00 .00 -9.1% 7,000.00 7,000.00 40,000.00 .00 7,000.00 39,954.45 7,000.00 40,000.00 .0% 5,500.00 .00 5,500.00 3,621.99 5,500.00 .00 5,500.00 .00 .0% 750.00 750.00 765.00 165,000.00 750.00 165,000.00 750.00 .0% 187,750.00 187,750.00 105,214.94 187,750.00 185,250.00 -1.316 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 40,000.00 40,000.00 39,954.45 40,000.00 .00 - 100.0% .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 165,000.00 165,000.00 .00 165,000.00 .00 - 100.0% 70,000.00 70,000.00 .00 70,000.00 550,000.00 685.7% ' .00 .00 .00 .00 350,000.00 .096 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00. .0% 275,000.00 275,000.00 39,954.45 275,000.00 900,000.00 227.3% 1,014,499.00 1,014,499.00 531,760.02 1,014,499.00 1,652,122.00 62.9% 61023511 511461 SUPERVISOR 84,062.88 83,741.00 83,741.00 51,854.88 83,741.00 85,416.00 2.0% 02/17/2012 09:33 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20132 WATER TOWN JE REEDING, MIA (TOWN OF READING NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS FY13 Enterprise Funds 2011 2012 2012 ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 2 -ADNIN PG 5 Ibgnyrpts PERIOD 99. PCT CEANGE 61023511 511481 SNOW RMVL - 500.00 - 500.00 - .00 - 500.00 - 500.00 .00 .0% 61023511 515000 OVERTIME 5,958.50 4,500.00 4,500.00 6,944.85 4,500.00 5,000.00 11.1% TOTAL SALARIES 90,021.38 87,741.00 87,741.00 58,799.73 97,741.00 89,916.00 2.51; 05 EXPENSES 61025521 521301 ELECTRICIT 24,596.31 21,000.00 21,000.00 12,994.63 21,000.00 24,000.00 14.3% 61025521 521308 FUEL OIL 2,077.62 3,000.00 3,000.00 .00 3,000.00 3,000.00 .0% 61025521 521309 SWR /STM WA 500.00 500.00 214.72 500.00 500.00 107.36 .016 61025521 521390 TELEPHONE 1,616.96 3,000.00 3,000.00 682.27 3,000.00 2,500.00 -16.7% W 6X025524 524471 MWRA VALVE 10,000.00 10,000.00 .00 10,000.00 10,000.00 .0% co 61025530 530000 .00 OUT PRFSVC 5,781.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 1,558.50 10,000.00 10,000.00 .0% 61025530 530457 WELLS 2,073.86 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 61025540 540000 DEPT SUPP 1,439.80 6,000.00 6,000.00 1,246.74 6,000.00 6,000.00 .0% 61025540 540455 WELLS 10,990.54 20,000.00 20,000.00 8,845.05 20,000.00 20,000.00 .0% 61025540 540499 WTR EMERGN .00 .00 .00 1,180.44 .00 .00 .0% 61025563 563400 MWRA 1,726,878.00 1,759,085.00 1,759,085.00 1,240,672.30 1,759,085.00 1,813,825.00 3.1% TOTAL EXPENSES 1,775,660.81 1,832,585.00 1,832,585.00 1,267,287.29 1,832,585.00 1,889,825.00 3.1% 08 CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 61028583 583000 PLANT .00 30,000.00 94,000.00 93,630.00 30,000.00 56,000.00 -40.4% 61028585 585453 EMERG ENGI 37,000.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENDITURES . .00 30,000.00 94,000.00 93,630.00 30,000.00 93,000.00 -1.1% TOTAL WATER - SUPPLY / TREAT 1,865,690.19 1,950,326.00 2,014,326.00 1,419,717.02 1,950,326.00 2,072,741.00 2.9% 0990 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES /USES 09 OTHER FINANCING USES *+ END OF REPORT - Generated by Bob LeLacheur *w N A O 7OVM OF READING, MA 02/17/2012 09:33 OF READING PG - 6 blelacheur (TOWN NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS bgnyrpts PROJECTION: 20132 FY13 Enterprise Funds FOR PERIOD 99 WATER 2011 2012 2012 2012 2012 2013 PCT ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD ACTUAL PROJECTION 2 -ADMIN CHANGE 61009590 599910 DEBT COSTS .00 .00 .00. 2,500.00 .00 .00 .0% TOTAL OTHER FINANCING USES .00 .00 .00 2,500.00 .00 .00 .0% TOTAL OTHER FINANCING SOURCE .00 .00 .00 2,500.00 .00 .00 .0% TOTAL WATER 5,165,450.15 5,672,710.00 5,922,710.01 2,971,972.52 5,672,710.00 5,802,870.00 -2.0% GRAND TOTAL 5,165,450.15 5,672,710.00 5,922,710.01 2,971,972.52 5,672,710.00 5,802,870.00 -2.0% *+ END OF REPORT - Generated by Bob LeLacheur *w N A O N a J Water Enterprise Fund Capital + Debt Approved Requested Projected =_> Le end: Debt Issued and Debtx not eta roved Water Ent. Fund Capital & Debt FY -2012 FY -2013 FY -2014 FY -2015 FY -2016 FY -2017 FY -2018 FY -2019 FY -2020 FY -2021 FY -2022 Water CAPITAL "- 783:500i 993,000 616;000 ..5401000 ;510,000,., 200,000 300,000 .212,000 ,• :487,000 720,000 450;000' Water Supply Treatment Plant Design 1 Debt Debt Debt Debt MWRA ($3.18mil partial join) 2 Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt MWRA ($7.8mil full join) 3 Debt Debt Debt- - Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt WTP demo & chlorine ($800k) 4 Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt WTP demo & chlorine ($450k) 5 Debt Wells Upgrade 200,000 Well Abandonment 225,000 Hydraulic Study - 2nd Connect 94,000 56,000 Replace Pickup Truck #3 (2003) 37,000 Water Distribution Various Water Mains ($2.471 mil) 6 Debt WM:Haverhill &Howard ($2.285m) 71 1 Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt WM: Howard - County- Summer 414,500 WM: South - West- Gleason($1m) 8 Debtx Debtx Debtx Debtx Debtx WM: Caus, Road loop 276,000 WM: H St. loop (Ivy St.) 350,000 WM: Larch Lane . 120,000 Water Main Lining 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 Meter Replacement 250,000 250,000 250,000 Water System Hydraulic Model 85,000 Tank Inspect & Design: Auburn(FY12) 70,000 12,000 12,000 Tank Maintenance: Auburn 550,000 Tank Maintenance: Bear Hill 220,000 Bear Hill Storage Tank ($1.15mil) 91 Debtx Debtx Debtx Debtx Booster Station SCADA 165,000 SCADA Upgrade (every 5 yrs) 20,000 25,000 Replace Bob Cat loader Replace Pickup Truck #12 (1997) 40,000 Replace Van #2 Replace Truck #6 120,000 Replace Truck #14 120,000 Replace Backhoe #420E 100,000 Replace Utility Truck #5 150,000 N a N Water Enterprise Fund Capital + Debt Approved Requested Projected =_> Le end: Debt Issued and Debtx not et appro ved Water Ent. Fund Capital& Debt FY -2012 Water DEBT 1 1785,691 FY -2013 FY -2014 FY -2015 FY -2016 FY -2017 FY -2018 FY -2019 I FY -2020 FY -2021 FY -2022 ,-1, 326;051: 1,299,2W.,- 1,27,1721 1,406,505 '1365,733 .1;327,067- .:1,515,571 -1 465, 595 -,- 14215,219, 1,178;269 Water Treatment Plant Design 1 116,300 112,700 109,000 104,500 Join MWRA(partial $3.18m) 2 264,656 258,656 252,656 2462656 237,719 229,719 224,069 217,669 211,269 204,869 198,469 Join MWRA(full $7.8m) 3 647,400 632,775 618,150 603,525 588,656 571,350 553,800 538,200 522,600 507,000 491,400 Demo WTP /chlorinate($0.8m) 4 95,860 93,420 90,980 88,540 86,100 83,660 81,220 Demo WTP /chlorinate ($450k) 5 153,000 Water Mains($2.471 m) 6 508,375 WM:Haverhill &Howard ($2.285m) 7 228,500 228,500 228,500 •228,500 228,500 228,500 228,500 228,500 228,500 228,500 WM. South - West- Gleason($lm) 8 265,530 252,504 239,478 226,452 213,426 Bear Hill Storage Tank $1.15mil 91 1 304,750 289,800 274,850 259,900 Repayment of Principal: J 1,370,000 958,500 958,500 958,500 1,058,900 1,058,900 1,058,900 1,208,900 1,208,900 12008,500 1,006,500 Water Treatment Plant Design 1 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Join MWRA(partial $3.18m) 2 160,000 160,000 160,000 160,000 160,000 160,000 160,000 160,000 160,000 160,000 1602000 Join MWRA(full $7.8m) 3 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 Demo WTP /chlorinate($0.8m) 4 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 Demo WTP /chlorinate ($450k) 5 150,000 Water Mains($2.471 m) 6 490,000 WM:Haverhill &Howard ($2.285m) 7 228,500 228,500 228,500 228,500 228,500 228,500 228,500 228,500 228,500 228,500 INKSouth- West- Gleason($1m) 8 200,400 200,400 200,400 200,400 200,400 Bear Hill Storage Tank $1.15mil 91 230,000 230,000 230,000 230,000 Interest on Long Term Debt: 1 415,591 367,551 340,786 313,221 347,605 306,833 268,167 306,671 256,695 206,719 169,769 Water Treatment Plant Design 11 16,300 12,700 9,000 4,500 Join MWRA(partial $3.18m) 21 104,656 98,656 92,656 86,656 77,719 69,719 642069 57,669 51,269 44,869 38,469 Join MWRA(full $7.8m) 3 257,400 242,775 228,150 213,525 198,656 181,350 163,800 148,200 132,600 117,000 101,400 Demo WTP /chlorinate($0.8m) 4 15,860 13,420 10,980 8,540 6,100 3,660 1,220 Demo WTP /chlorinate ($450k) 5 3,000 Water Mains($2.471 m) 6 18,375 WM:Haverhill &Howard ($2.285m) 7 WM: South - West- Gleason($lm) 8 65,130 52,104 39,078 26,052 13,026 Bear Hill Storage Tank ($1.15mi1) 9 74,750 59,800 44,850 29,900 Water Ent. Fund Capital &Debt --* ,- .---- �- . -..- -� , Water Capital 783,500 993,000 616,000 540,000 1 510,000 200,000 300,000 212,000 487,000 720,000 450,000 Water Debt 1,785,591 1,326,051 1,299,286 1,271,721 1,406,505 1,365,733 1,327,067 1,515,571 1,465,595 1,215,219 1,178,269 Total:Capital &:Debt- - .7;569;091 "`2;319;051 4;1,915,286.'f,81,1;721' "1, 916; 505•.:1;565,733;.'1,627;067 1,727,571: 1, 952 ,595: "1,935219- 1;628;269 -_ :. _.._ Na CA) Water Enterprise Fund Capital + Debt FY13.28 Water Ent. Fund Capital & Debt FY -2023 FY -2024 FY -2025 I FY -2026 FY -2027 - FY -2028 TOTAL Wafer' CAPITAL`: ... — .jl- -_ - -.* _ _ -, .. - ; ' -- _ 5,028,000 Water Supply Treatment Plant Design 1 MWRA ($3.18mil partial join) 2 Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt MWRA ($7.8mil full join) 3 Debt - Debt Debt Debt Debt Debt WTP demo & chlorine ($800k) 4 WTP demo & chlorine ($450k) 5. Wells Upgrade 200,000 Well Abandonment 225,000 Hydraulic Study - 2nd Connect 56,000 Replace Pickup Truck #3 (2003) 37,000 Water Distribution Various Water Mains ($2.471mi1 ) 6 WM:Haverhill &Howard ($2.285m) 7 WM: Howard - County- Summer WM: South - West- Gleason($1m) 8 WM: Causway Road loop 276,000 WM: H St. loop (Ivy St.) 350,000 WM: Larch Lane 120,000 Water Main Lining 1,600,000 Meter Replacement 750,000 Water System Hydraulic Model 85,000 Tank Inspect & Design: Auburn(FY12) 24,000 Tank Maintenance: Auburn 550,000 Tank Maintenance: Bear Hill 220,000 Bear Hill Storage Tank ($1.15mil) 91 Debfx Booster Station SCADA SCADA Upgrade (every 5 yrs) 45,000 Replace Bob Cat loader Replace Pickup Truck #12 (1997) Replace Van #2 Replace Truck #6 120,000 Replace Truck #14 120,000 Replace Backhoe #420E 100,000 Replace Utility Truck #5 150,000 N .p a Water Enterprise Fund Capital + Debt FY13.28 Water Ent. Fund Capital& Debt FY -2023 FY -2024 I FY -2025 I FY -2026 FY -2027 FY -2028 TOTAL VRUDEBT-_-."- 7,`'912,819 645;869 - 623;575- .591,375 569,588 397,800 17,112,041 Water Treatment Plant Design 1 326,200 Join MWRA(partial $3.18m) 2 192,069 185,669 178,975 162,375 156,188 3,157,025 Join MWRA(full $7.8m) 3 475,800 460,200 444,600 429,000 413,400 397,800 8,248,256 Demo WTP /chlorinate($0.8m) 4 523,920 Demo WTP /chlorinate ($450k) 5 Water Mains($2.471 m) 6 WM:Haverhill &Howard ($2.285m) 7 2,285,000 WM: South- West- Gleason($lm) 8 1,197,390 Bear Hill Storage Tank $1.15mil 9 244,950 1 74,250 Repayment of Principal: 780,000 550,000 550,000 540,000 540,000 390,000 13,837,000 Water Treatment Plant Design 1 300,000 Join MWRA(partial $3.18m) 2 160,000 160,000 160,000 150,000 150,000 2,380,000 Join MWRA(full $7.8m) 3 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 6,240,000 Demo WTP /chlorinate($0.8m) 4 480,000 Demo WTP /chlorinate ($450k) 5 WaterMains($2.471m) 6 WM:Haverhill &Howard ($2.285m) 7 2,285,000 WM: South - West- Gleason($1m) 8 1,002,000 Bear Hill Storage Tank $1.15mil 9 230,000 1,150,000 Interest on Long Term Debt: 132,619 95,869 73,575 51,375 7,800 3,275,041 Water Treatment Plant Design 1 26,200 Join MWRA(partial $3.18m) 2 32,069 25,669 18,975 12,375. 777,025 Join MWRA(full $7.8m) 3 85,800 70,200 54,600 39,000 7,800 2,008,256 Demo WTP /chlorinate($0.8m) 4 M231400 43,920 Demo WTP /chlorinate ($450k) 5 WaterMains($2.471m) 6 WM:Haverhill &Howard ($2.285m) 7 WM: South - West- Gleason($lm) 1 81 1 195,390 Bear Hill Storage Tank ($1.15mil) 91 14,950 224,250 Water Ent. Fund Capital & Debt Water Capital 5,028,000 Water Debt 912,819 645,869 623,575 591,375 569,588 397,800 17,112,041 Total Ca ital & Debt 912,819 `645;869 "';623,575,- 591,375" 569,588 397,800 22,140,041 N A cn Sewer Enterprise Fund The Sewer division is responsible for maintaining and operating the municipal main sewer systems in accordance with all applicable state, federal and MWRA regulations for the collection and discharge of wastewater. The specific functions are: maintenance and repair of 100 miles of sewer mains and 12 pumping stations; respond to customer complaints for sewer backups and drainage problems. The chart below summarizes the proposed FY13 budget: Sewer Fund FY12 FY13 Change Wages $267,908 $275,144 +2.7% Ex (non -MWRA ) $396,300 $403,926 +1.9% MWRA Expense* $4,164,476 $4,383,478 +5.3% Capital $157,000 $330,000 +110.2% Debt $162,206 $115,800 -28.0% Other $259,004 1 $264,198 +2.0% TOTAL $5,406,894 1 $5,772,546 +6.8% * +62% versus final FY12 assessment of S4,128,058 There are no changes in FTEs and wages are increased to reflect a 2% increase for non -union or at a level consistent with union contracts. Non -MWRA expenses are funded to adjust to recent trends. One new expense for FY13 is the funding of Other Post Employment Benefits, consistent with the pattern in other funds. In FY13 a new $350,000 sewer main project for Whittier Road/Poet's Corner has been added. Some of this will be financed by existing MWRA interest -free loans (see item Id in the debt service schedule), but $200,000 will come from capital. Starting in FY14, generic sewer main projects are added to the capital plan, as recent inflow and infiltration repairs have identified other areas that need further attention. Also beginning in FY.14 are the first two (West St. $300k and Joseph's Way $270k) of twelve sewer station repairs that are needed, as identified by a recently completed study. The projects are listed in departmental priority order. However, other considerations may rearrange this order — for example, developer offset funds for the Sturges station may move this project ahead of the FY16 listed priority date. Debt financing for all twelve of these projects was considered but discarded for several reasons. First, for the $4.16 million in anticipated capital repairs, full debt interest costs might run at $1.14 million, whereas the plan as listed only has one small debt item expected to cost $0.11 million. This $lmillion difference in cost is significant. Second, as a practical matter repairs on all twelve stations would need to be spread out over a few years. Done as presented in seven years is no disadvantage when compared to done in three years if debt financed. Third; doing these projects on a pay -as- you -go basis allows for flexibility both in terms of capital work and financing, in case other priorities arise. See the following discussion on rates and reserves to see policy suggestions for the future. 02/17/2012 10:00 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20132 SEWER TO"A N OF REHDIN G�, TOWN OF READING INERT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS FY13 Enterprise Funds 2011 2012 2012 ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 2 -ADMIN PG 1 Ibgnyrpte PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 0440 SEWER - OPERATIONS 03 SALARIES 62003511 511401 SUPERVISOR 38,826.40 39,609.00 39,609.00 24,430.36 39,609.00 40,393.00 2.0% 62003511 511405 WRKNG FRMN 49,893.39 53,239.00 53,239.00 31,582.94 53,239.00 50,825.00 -4.5% 62003511 511409 EQUIP OP - 51,907.68 51,908.00 51,908.00 34,043.55 51,908.00 54,539.00 5.1% 62003511 511413 - SKLLD LAHR 3,500.21 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 62003511 511417 LABORER 54,557.71 66,062.00 66,062.00 42,493.85 66,062.00 69,747.00 5.6% 62003511 511471 CLERK(S) 17,268.81 17,598.00 17,598.00 10,599.44 17,598.00 18,640.00 5.9% 62003511 511481 SNOW RMVL N .00 - 2,500.00 - 2,500.00 .00 - 2,500.00 - 2,500.00 .0% A 62003511 515000 OVERTIME T 21,296.14 35,000.00 35,000.00 18,181.02 35,000.00 35,000.00 .016 62003511 516050 OUT OF GRA 3,838.40 2,000.00 2,000.00 3,018.40 2,000.00 3,500.00 75.0% 62003511.516060 ONCALL PRM 2,196.00 2,942.00 2,942.00 1,743.00 2,942.00 2,950.00 .311 62003511 516080 LONGEVITY 1,950.00 2,050.00 2,050.00 1,075.00 2,050.00 2,050.00 .0% 62003517 517017 SCK LV BBK .00 - .00 .00 2,968.63 .00 .00 .O% TOTAL SALARIES 245,234.74 267,908.00 267,908.00 170,136.19 267,908.00 275,144.00 2.7 %, 05 EXPENSES 62005519 519000 MEDICARE 1,595.53 1,075.00 1,075.00 .00 1,075.00 1,125.00 4.7% 62005519 519700 RETIREMENT 22,273.00 23,275.00 23,275.00 23,275.00 23,275.00 27,234.00 17.0% 62005519 519750 OPEB CONTR .00 .00 .01 .00 .00 9,667.00 .0% 62005521 521301 ELECTRICIT 26,781.71 33,000.00 33,000.00 18,273.18 33,000.00 33,000.00 .0% 62005524 524469 STATIONREP .00 30,000.00 30,000.00 .00 30,000.00 30,000.00 .0% 02/17/2012 10:00 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20132 SEWER OF READ1 NiJ. 1 \4A TOWN OF READING (NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS FY13 Enterprise Funds 2011 2012 2012 ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 2 -ADMIN PG 2 Ibgnyrpts PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 62005524 524474 MANHOLE .00 10,000.00 10,000.00 .00 10,000.00 10,000.00 .0% 62005524 524475 I &I REIMS 800.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 62005524 524476 I &IPREVENT .00 100,000.00 100,000.00 .00 100,000.00 100,000.00 .0% 62005529 529433 HAZ WST DI " 9,970.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 7,106.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 .0% 62005530 530000 PURCH SVC - 20,495.33 - 16,650.00 16,650.00 11,019.99 16,650.00 20,000.00 20.116 62005530 530110 LGL COUNSL .00 2,500.00 2,500.00 .00 2,500.00 2,500.00 .0% 62005530 530420 PLCE DTAIL 5,387.10 5,000.00 5,000.00 10,778.11 5,000.00 6,000.00 20.0% 62005530 530490 CNTSVCPUMP 8,943.43 15,000.00 15,000.00 10,703.02 15,000.00 15,000.00 .096 62005530 530492 SYS INSPEC 1,761.58 16,000.00 16,000.00 9,600.00 16,000.00 15,000.00 -6.3% N 62005531 531000 PRDEV TRN .00 500.00 500.00 .00 500.00 1,000.00 100.0% J 62005536 536000 LIC SFTWR 11000.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 .00 10,000.00 10,000.00 .0% 62005540 540490 PMPSTASUPP 3,776.68 7,000.00 7,000.00 2,557.97 7,000.00 7,000.00 .0% 62005540 540493 DIST SYS 3,786.54 8,000.00 8,000.00 1,092.41 8,000.00 8,000.00 .0% 62005540 540495 CHEMICALS 3,339.48 12,000.00 12,000.00 3,426.13 12,000.00 12,000.00 "0% 62005554 554000 UNFM /CLOTH 2,079.96 2,200.00 2,200.00 1,184.98 2,200.00 2,200.00 .096 62005563 563400 MWRA 3,922,082.00 4,164,476.00 4,164,476.00 2,889,640.60 4,164,476.00 4,383,478.00 5.3% 62005574 574000 HEALTHINS 63,975.69 75,000.00 75,000.00 42,501.35 75,000.00 70,000.00 -6.7% 62005574.574010 P &C INSUR 726.00 1,100.00 1,100.00 1,127.00 1,100.00 1,200.00 9.1% 62005574 574500 DEDUCT /CLM 1,090.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 62005574 574550 WC INSURNC 10,368.00 18,000.00 18,000.00 11,624.00 18,000.00 13,000.00 -27.8% 62005578 578100 LICENSES 135.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .016 TOTAL EXPENSES 4,110,367.03 4,560,776.00 4,560,776.01 3,043,909.74 4,560,776.00 4,787,404.00 5.0% 07 DEBT SERVICE 62007591 591000 LT OUT PRI - 116,800.00 160,800.00 160,800.00 116,800.00 160,800.00 115,800.00 -28.0% 02/17/2012 10:00 blelacheur PROJECTION: 20132 SEWER r0! ", N OF READ!N G, MIA TOWN OF READING INERT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS FY13 Enterprise Funds 2011 2012 2012 ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION FOR 2013 2 -ADNIN PG 3 bgnyrpts PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 62007591 592000 LTDEBTINT 4,312.50 1,406.00 1,406.00 1,406.25 1,406.00 .00 - 100.0$ TOTAL DEBT SERVICE 121,112.50 162,206.00 162,206.00 118,206.25 162,206.00 115,800.00 -28.6$ 08 CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 62008584 584416 TRUCK #6 .00 43,000.00 43,000.00 42,759.46 43,000.00 .00 - 100.0$ 62008584 584417 TRUCK #10 .00 39,000.00 39,000.00 38,864.46 39,000.00 .00 - 100.0$ 62008584 584422 BACKHOE ..00 .00 ,.00 .00 .00 130,000.00 .0$ 62008585 585451 METRINSTAL - - 25,651.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 62008588 588411 CALIF RD S 239,724.65 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0$ N A 62008588 588450 SYSTEMS .00 .00 .00 .00 200,000.00 .0$ OD 62008588 588505 .00 INFLOW /INF 62,742.51 75,000.00 75,000.00 61- ,406.97 75,000.00 .00 - 100.0$ TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 328,118.16 157,000.00 157,000.00 143,030.89 157,000.00 330,000.00 110.2$ 09 OTHER FINANCING USES 62009596 596111 WAGE -TWNMG 14,062.00 14,062.00 14,062.00 .00 14,062.00 14,345.00 2.0$ 62009596 596121 WAGE -ACTNG 9,517.00 9,517.00 9,517.00 .00 9,517.00, 9,710.00 2.0$ 62009596 596122 EXP ACING 170.00 170.00 170.00 .00 170.00 .175.00 2.9$ 62009596 596131 WAGE -FINCE 30,249.00 30,249.00 30,249.00 .00 30,249.00 - 30,860.00 2.0$ 62009596 596132 EXEFINANCE 20,440.00 20,440.00 20,440.00 .00 20,440.00 20,850.00 2.0$ 62009596 596141 WAGE HR ' 4,628.00 4,628.00 4,628.00 .00 4,628.00 4,721.00 2.01; 62009596 596142 EXP HR 2,137.00 2,137.00 2,137.00 .00 2,137.00 2,180.00 2.0$ 62009596 596151 WAGE TECHN 29,998.00 29,998.00 29,998.00 .00 29,998.00 _ 30,598.00 2.0$ N A 09 OTHER FINANCING USES W 62009590 599910 DEBT COSTS .00 TOTAL OTHER FINANCING USES .00 TOTAL OTHER FINANCING SOURCE .00 TOTAL SEWER 5,063,836.43 GRAND TOTAL 5.063.836.43 PG ' 4 bgnyrpts .00 TOWN OF READING, MA 02/17/2012 10:00 99 OF READING 2012 blelacheur (TOWN NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS PROJECTION: 20132 FY13 Enterprise Funds ACTUAL SEWER ._00 2 -ADNIN .0% CHANGE 2011 2012 2012 29,289.00 ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 62009596 596152 EXP TECH 5,772,546.00 48,425.00 ** END OF 28,715.00 28,715.00 28,715.00 62009596 596161 WAGEDPWADM 61,266.00 2.0% 47,475.00 47,475.00 47,475.00 ' 62009596 596171 WAGE ENGIN 2.0% 60,065.00 60,065.00 60,065.00 62009596 596181 WAGE HGWY 2.0% .00 2,419.00 2,419.00 2,419.00 62009596 596182• EXP HGWY 3,475,283.07 5,406,894.00 9,129.00 9,129.00 9,129.00 TOTAL OTHER FINANCING USES 259,004.00 259,004.00 259,004.00 TOTAL SEWER - OPERATIONS 5,063,836.43 5,406,894.00 5,406,894.01 0990 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES /USES N A 09 OTHER FINANCING USES W 62009590 599910 DEBT COSTS .00 TOTAL OTHER FINANCING USES .00 TOTAL OTHER FINANCING SOURCE .00 TOTAL SEWER 5,063,836.43 GRAND TOTAL 5.063.836.43 PG ' 4 bgnyrpts .00 .00 2,500.00 FOR PERIOD 99 2012 2012 2,500.00 2013 .00 PCT .00 ACTUAL PROJECTION ._00 2 -ADNIN .0% CHANGE .00 28,715.00 5,406,894.00 29,289.00 6.8% 2.03 5,406,894.01 .00 47,475.00 5,772,546.00 48,425.00 ** END OF 2.0% Bob LeLacheur �• .00 60,065.00 61,266.00 2.0% .00 2,419.00 2,467.00 2.0% .00 9,129.00 9,312.00 2.0% .00 259,004.00 - 264,198.00 '2.0% 3,475,283.07 5,406,894.00 5,772,546.00 6.8% .00 .00 2,500.00 .00 .00 .0% .00 .00 2,500.00 .00 .00 .0% .00 .00 2,500.00 ._00 .00 .0% 5,406,894.00 5,406,894.01 3,477,783.07 5,406,894.00 5,772,546.00 6.8% 5,406,894.00 5,406,894.01 3,477,783.07 5,406,894.00 5,772,546.00 6.846 ** END OF REPORT - Generated by Bob LeLacheur �• N 0 Sewer Enterprise Fund Capital + Debt Approved Requested Projected = => FY13.22 Sewer Ent. Fund Capital& Debt FY -2012 FY -2013 FY -2014 FY -2015 FY -2016 FY -2017 FY -2018 FY -2019 FY -2020 FY -2021 FY -2022 TOTAL Sewer Capital 157,000 330,000 682,000 670,000 365,000 445,000 435,000 825,000 820,000 400,000 400,000 5,372,000 Sewer Debt 162,206 115,800 106,934 106,934 451,667 433,517 385,091 - - - - 1,599,943 Total Capital & Debt 319,206 445,800 788,934 776,934 816,667 878,517 820,091 825,000 820,000 400,000 400,000 6,971,943 Sewer CAPITAL `' 157,000 - 330,000' ` 682,000 670,000 365,000 445,000 435,000 825,OOD ' 820,000 . 400,000 - = 400,000 '. 5,372,000' Inflow & Infiltration 1 Town share moved to Operating Budget in FY12 Seal Sewer Manholes Sewer Station Rehabilitation moved to Op erating Budget in FY12 Main: Fairview /Sunnyside 2 Debt Main: California Rd Main: Lewis Street 75,000 Main: Poet's Corner ($350k) 200,000 200,000 Sewer Main projects 75,000 150,000 75,000 100,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 1,000,000 Station: West St. 300,000 300,000 Station: Batchelder Rd. 520,000 520,000 Station: Joseph's Way 270,000 270,000 Station: Sturges 690,000 690,000 Station: Sturges offset (500,000) (500,000) Station: Small Lane 100,000 100,000 Station: Charles St. (1.1mll) Debtx Debtx Debtx Station: Grove St. 280,000 280,000 Portable Generator - Grove 15,000 15,000 Station: Strout Ave. 290,000 290,000 Station: Brewer Lane 250,000 250,000 Station: Collins Ave. 410,000 410,000 Portable Generator - Collins 15,000 15,000 Station: Longwood Rd. 270,000 270,000 Station: Pitman Drive 150,000 150,000 Meter Replacements 250,000 250,000 250,000 750,000 Backhoe 430D 130,000 130,000 Replace Vehicles 82,000 37,000 150,000 45,000 232,000 N U1 Sewer Enterprise Fund Capital + Debt Approved Requested Projected = => FY13.22 Sewer Ent. Fund Capital& Debt FY -2012 FY -2013 FY -2014 FY -2015 FY -2016 FY -2017 FY -2018 FY -2019 FY -2020 FY -2021 FY -2022 TOTAL Sewer Capital 157,000 330,000 682,000 670,000 365,000 445,000 435,000 825,000 820,000 400,000 400,000 5,372,000 Sewer Debt 162,206 115,800 106,934 106,934 451,667 433,517 385,091 - - 1,599,943 Total Capital & Debt 319,206 445,800 788,934 776,934 816,667 878,517 820,091 825,000 820,000 400,000 400,000 6,971,943 Sewer DEBT - ';'. :162,206 ;_ °115,800 - :106;934 -106;934: `451;667:;, 433;517=;. 385,091 ,:1;599,943' MWRA Inflow & Infiltration 1 85,800 115,800 106,934 106,934 30,000 30,000 - 389,668 Sunnyside /Fairview Sewer 2 76,406 Station: Charles St. 1.1 mil) 421,667 403,517 385,091 1,210,275 Repayment of Principal: 160,800 115,800 106,934 106,934 396,667 396,667 366,666 1,489,668 MWRA Inflow & Infiltration la 32,934 32,934 32,934 32,934 98,802 MWRA Inflow & Infiltration lb 8,866 8,866 8,866 MWRA Inflow & Infiltration 1c 44,000 44,000 44,000 44,000 132,000 MWRA Inflow & Infiltration ld 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 150,000 Sunnyside /Fairview Sewer 2 75,000 Station: Charles St. 1.1 mil) 366,667 1 366,667 366,666 1,100,000 Interest on Long Term Debt: 1,406 55,000 36,850 18,425 110,275 MWRA Inflow & Infiltration no interest Sunnyside /Fairview Sewer 2 1,406 Station: Charles St. 1.1 mil 55,000 36,850 18,425 110,275 SEWER STATION PROGRAM PLAN SHOWN ABOVE 3.06mil net capital + 1.1mil debt Yd Yr2 Yr3 Yr4 Yr5 Yr6 I Yr7 Yr8 Yr9 Yrl0 4,270,275 ITOTAL 570,000 520,000 711,667 698,517 675,091 675,000 420,000 4,160,000 PRIN 570,000 520,000 656,667 661,667 656,666 675,000 420,000 ALTERNATE 4.16mil net debt)° 110,275 JINT 55,000 1 36,850 1 18,425 - 5,304,000 TOTAL 624,000 603,200 582,400 561,600 520,000 499,200 478,400 457,600 436,800 4,160,000 PRIN 416,000 416,000 416,000 416,000 416,000 416,000 416,000 416,000 416,000 1,144,000 INT 208,000 187,200 166,400 145,600 t134,291 104,000 83,200 62,400 41,600 20,800 DIFFERENCE 0,033.725) 83,200 129,267 136,917 155,000 79,200 478,400 ' (457.600) 436,800 Storm Water Enterprise Fund The Storm Water division consists of some activities conducted under the general fund budget, and some in the enterprise fund budget. As a whole, they are responsible for the construction, maintenance and repair of all catch basins and drainage systems. As established by Town Meeting several years ago, this Enterprise Fund conducts storm water activities that were not being done by the general fund. Federal regulations continue to bring new and expensive costs to the Town. The $40 annual charge for a single family home produces almost $400,000 in annual revenues (including commercial ry customers that pay per square foot of impervious surface). Thus n"'i rates will not need to change for FY13, and the reserve fund ($376,011) will not be needed to support this budget. Ctnrm Water F.nternrke Fund Two large scale ($4.0 million Saugus River & $2.2 million Aberjona River) capital projects that have been in the Storm Water capital improvements plan since inception have been pushed out to FYI 8. The design and permitting capital costs for these projects are in FY15 and FY16. This delay allows ample opportunity for a community dialogue about these projects. This budget does not yet forecast that new federal requirements will add any additional large scale projects. One new expense for FY13 is the funding of Other Post Employment Benefits, consistent with the pattern in other funds. FY12 FY13 Change Wages $127,765 $134,232 +5.1% Expenses $ 58,885 $ 64,080 +8.8% Debt & Capital $190,000 $190,000 0.0% TOTAL $376,650 $388,312 +3.1% Two large scale ($4.0 million Saugus River & $2.2 million Aberjona River) capital projects that have been in the Storm Water capital improvements plan since inception have been pushed out to FYI 8. The design and permitting capital costs for these projects are in FY15 and FY16. This delay allows ample opportunity for a community dialogue about these projects. This budget does not yet forecast that new federal requirements will add any additional large scale projects. One new expense for FY13 is the funding of Other Post Employment Benefits, consistent with the pattern in other funds. OVEIN OF RE�„DINt . NfA 02/13/2012 20:54 (TOWN OF READING blelacheur NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS PROJECTION: 20132 FY13 Enterprise Funds STORM WATER MANAGEMENT 2011 2012 2012 'ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD 2012 ACTUAL 2012 PROJECTION ' FOR 2013 2 -ADMIN PG 1 bgnyrpts PERIOD 99 PCT CHANGE 0428 STORM WATER MANAGEMENT 03 SALARIES 65003511 511417 LABORER 66,881.47 71,615.00 71,615.00 41,662.64 71,615.00 74,050.00 3.4% 65003511 511453 AST CV ENG .00 52,150.00 52,150.00 30,972.81 52,150.00 53,182.00 2.0% 65003511 515000 OVERTIME 1,686.46 2,500.00 2,500.00 2,464.47 2,500.00 4,000.00 60.0% 65003511 516050 OUT OF GRA 2,066.96 1,500.00 1,500.00 2,012.06 ,1,500.00 3,000.00 100.0% ' TOTAL SALARIES - 70,634.89 127,165.00 127,765.00 77,111.98 127,765.00 134,232.00 5.1% N3 05 EXPENSES Ln fA 65005519 519000 MEDICARE _ 1,140.42 .00 .00 .00 .00 1,200.00 .0% 65005519 519700 RETIREMENT - 847.00 885.00 885.00 885.00 885.00 2,210.00 149.7% 65005519 519750 OPEB CONTR ' .00 .00 .01 .00 .00 5,570.00 .0% 65005524 524428 DRAINMAINT .00 25,000.00 25,000.00 341.03 25,000.00 25,000.00 .0% 65005527 527301 EQUIP RENT .00 7,000.00 7,000.00 .00 7,000.00 7,000.00 .0% 65005530 530000 OUT PRFSVC 1,863.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 .00 10,000.00 10,000.00 .0% 65005554 554000 CLOTHING 800.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 500.00 1,000.00 1,100.00 10.0% 65005574 574000 HEALTH INS .00 15,000.00 15,000.00 4,281.35 15,000.00 12,000.00 -20.0% TOTAL EXPENSES 4,650.42 58,885.00 58,885.01 6,007.38 58,885.00 64,080.00 8.8% 08 CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 65008584 584413 EXCAVATOR .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 65,000.00 .0% 65008584 584420 ST SWEEPER " 139,184.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0 % TU\NN OF READING, IMA 02/13/2012 20:54 (TOWN OF READING blelacheui NEXT YEAR / CURRENT YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS PROJECTION: 20132 FY13 Enterprise Funds STORM WATER MANAGEMENT 2011 2012 2012 2012 ACTUAL ORIG BUD REVISED BUD ACTUAL PG 2 bgnyrpts FOR PERIOD 99 2012 2013 PCT PROJECTION 2 -ADMIN CHANGE .00 65008585 585000 ADDTNL EQU .00 151,023.00 65008588 588412 DRNGE IMPR .00 .0% .00 65008588 588421 MAPPING DE 77,423.51 .00 65008588 588425 DRAINAGE -50.0% 40;000.00 4,763.16 40,000.00 TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENDITURES .00 294,970.16 TOTAL STORM WATER MANAGEMENT 25.0$ .00 370,255.47 0990 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES /USES 255.36 02 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES N 65002490 490099 XFR PROJFD .00 .0% - 40,000.00 65002490 499990 FREE CASH 77,678.87 - 55,000.00 TOTAL OTHER FINANCING SOURCE .0% 376,650.00 - 95,000.00 376,650.01 TOTAL OTHER FINANCING SOURCE 376,650.00 - 95,000.00 388,312.00 TOTAL STORM WATER MANAGEMENT 275,255.47 GRAND TOTAL 275.255.47 PG 2 bgnyrpts FOR PERIOD 99 2012 2013 PCT PROJECTION 2 -ADMIN CHANGE .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .0% 150,000.00 150,000.00 77,423.51 150,000.00 75,000.00 -50.0% 40;000.00 40,000.00 .00 40,000.00 50,000.00 25.0$ .00 .00 255.36 .00 .00 .0% 190,000..00 190,000.00 77,678.87 190,000.00 190,000.00 .0% 376,650.00 376,650.01 160,798.23 376,650.00 388,312.00 3.1% .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 376,650.00 376,650.01 160,798.23 376,650.00 376,650.01 160,798.23 •- END OF REPORT - Generated by Bob LeLacheur •� .00 .00 .0% .00 .00 .0% .00. .00 .0% .00 .00 .0% 376,650.00 388,312.00 3.1% 376,650.00 388,312.00 3.1% N CA al Storm Water Enterprise Fund Capital + Debt Approved Requested Projected = => Storm Water Ent. Fund Capital & Debt FY -2012 FY -2013 FY -2014 FY -2015 FY -2016 FY -2017 FY -2018 FY -2019 FY -2020 FY -2021 FY -2022 Storm Water Capital 190,000 190,000 190,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Storm Water Debt - - - - - - 1,023,000 982,700 942,400 902,100 861,800 Total Capital & Debt 190,000 190,000 190,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 1,123,000 1,082,700 1,042,400 11002,100 961,800 Storm Water CAPITAL _ ::' . 190,000 - -19000 190,000-'^200;000 200,000 200,000, 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 General Drainage moved to Operating Budget in FY12 Drainage Improvements (projects) 150,000 75,000 140,000 - 50,000 200,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 IVIS4 Permit: Consult & Lab test 40,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Saugus River Design & Permitting 150,000 Saugus River Improvement (1) $2mil 1 Debtx Debtx Debtx Debtx Debtx Saugus River Improvement (11) $2mil 2 Debtx Debtx Debtx Debtx Debtx Aberjona River Design & Permitting 150,000 Aberjona River Improvement $2.2mil 3 Debtx Debtx Debtx Debtx Debtx Sweeper: Elgin Pelican Truck: Int #15 Excavator (1985) 65,000 Storm Water,DEB7' : " _4 -' - 1,023,000 982,700 " "942;400 "; 902,100 -861,800 - Saugus Riverlmrpovement(I) 1 330,000 317,000 304,000 291,000 278,000 Saugus River lmrpovement(11) Aberiona River Improvement 2 3 330,000 363,000 317,000 348,700 304,000 334,400 291,000 320,100 278,000 305,800 Repayment of Principal: Saugus Riverlmrpovement(I) 1 620,000 200,000 620,000 200,000 620,000 200,000 620,000 200,000 620,000 200,000 Saugus River lmrpovement(II) 21 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 Aberfona River Improvement 31 1 220,000 220,000 220,000 220,000 220,000 Interest on Long Term Debt: 403,000 362,700 322,400 282,100 241,800 Saugus Riverlmrpovement(I) Saugus River lmrpovement(II) 1 2 130,000 130,000 117,000 117,000 104,000 104,000 91,000 91,000 78,000 78,000 Aberona River Improvement 3 143,000 128,700 114,400 100,100 85,800 N rn Storm Water Enterprise Fund Capital + Debt FYI 3-27 Storm Water Ent. Fund Capital& Debt FY -2023 FY -2024 FY -2025 FY -2026 FY -2027 TOTAL Storm Water Capital - - - - - 1,480,000 Storm Water Debt 821,500 781,200 740,900 700,600 660,300 8,416,500 Total Capital & Debt 821,500 781,200 740,900 700,600 660,300 9,896,500 Storm Water CAPITAL 1,480,000 General Drainage Drainage Improvements (projects) 965,000 MS4 Permit: Consult & Lab test 150,000 Saugus River Design & Permitting 150,000 Saugus River Improvement (1) $2mil 1 Debtx Debtx Debtx Debtx Debtx Saugus River Improvement (II ) $2mil 2 Debtx Debtx Debtx Debtx Debtx Aberjona River Design & Permitting 150,000 Aberjona River Improvement $2.2mil 3 Debtx Debtx Debtx Debtx Debtx Sweeper: Elgin Pelican Truck: Int #15 Excavator (1985) 65,000 Storm Water DEBT "" 821;5007 78T200'' ?740,900" ' :700,600' "-660,300 - 8;416,500 Saugus Riverlmrpovement(I) 1 265,000 252,000 239,000 226,000 213,000 2,715,000 Saugus River lmrpovement(II) 2 265,000 252,000 239,000 226,000 213,000 2,715,000 Abedona River Improvement 3 291,500 277,200 262,900 248,600 234,300 2,986,500 Repayment of Principal: 620,000 620,000 620,000 620,000 620,000 6,200,000 Saugus Riverlmrpovement(I) 1 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 2,000,000 Saugus River lmrpovement(II) 2 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 2,000,000 Abelona River lmprovement 3 220,000 220,000 220,000 220,000 220,000 2,200,000 Interest on Long Term Debt: 201,500 161,200 120,900 80,600. 40,300 2,216,500 Saugus Riverlmrpovement(1) 1 65,000 52,000 39,000 26,000 13,000 715,000 Saugus River 1mrpovement(11) 2 65,000 52,000 39,000 26,000 13,000 715,000 Aberjona River Improvement 3 71,500 57,200 42,900 28,600 14,300 786,500 N to Enterprise Fund Rates & Reserves In case of financial emergencies, we set aside at least 10% of annual expenditures (Water & Sewer) or $150,000 (Storm Water) to be held in Reserve Funds. Current reserves are well in excess of these levels: Reserves Jan. 2012 Target Level St. Water $376,011 $150,000 Water $1,011,630 $592,217 Sewer $1,187,837 $540,689 Combined $2,575,478 $1,282,906 Rates The Storm Water Fund rate for all residential parcels is set at a flat $40 annual fee. Commercial rates are then determined by their amount of impervious surface when compared to the average residential property. Water and sewer rates are set by a combination of budgets, use of reserves and the volume of usage of water /sewer. Note that 30% of the water budget and 77% of the sewer budget are MWRA charges. This means that 70% of water and 23% of sewer are fixed charges (such as debt service). Conservation efforts in water usage reduce the charges paid (30 %) to the MWRA for water, but rates may actually need to increase to pay those fixed costs (70 %). As the following chart shows, annual increases in combined rates have been below for 5% for the past three years as the MWRA has purposefully maneuvered to push costs beyond FY13 and locally we have used our reserves, each effort at a time of general economic difficulty. The outlook now is for 5% increases for the next several years, even while local reserve use continues. Recent Reserves History Excess reserves offer the flexibility to take advantage of mid- year opportunities, such as the decision by November 2011 Town Meeting to use $250,000 to advance the Howard Street water main project forward in order to qualify for an interest - free loan. This saved over $100,000 in future interest costs. For the past three years, the continued use of excess reserves has kept combined rates at low levels. As the next chart shows, water reserves hit a recent low in 2008 -2009 coincident with some one -time costs associated with closing the water treatment plant and shifting the water supply to the MWRA. In 2010 some Change in Annual Combined Water & Sewer Rates 12.0% T, 100% B.0% ` 6.0% 4.0% N 20% 4 0.0% 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Recent Reserves History Excess reserves offer the flexibility to take advantage of mid- year opportunities, such as the decision by November 2011 Town Meeting to use $250,000 to advance the Howard Street water main project forward in order to qualify for an interest - free loan. This saved over $100,000 in future interest costs. For the past three years, the continued use of excess reserves has kept combined rates at low levels. As the next chart shows, water reserves hit a recent low in 2008 -2009 coincident with some one -time costs associated with closing the water treatment plant and shifting the water supply to the MWRA. In 2010 some N cn OD legal environmental settlements were deposited in the water reserve fund and in 2011 some surpluses from past capital projects were closed out and added to the sewer reserve fund, resulting in fund balances that are now well over the 10% target levels. Therefore excess reserves are available to offset some rate increases in the future. Forecast FY13 Rates MWRA Reading MWRA Assessments According to the MWRA, their FY13 budget will be the last of a three -year commitment to keep their rate increases low during difficult economic times. They cut spending, restructured debt, and temporarily suspended commitments to growing liabilities over this period. Almost one year ago the MWRA forecast a 3.9% combined system -wide rate increase for both FY12 and FY13, followed by annual increases of almost 8% for several years afterwards. For FY13 they have released the estimates which are used in the Town's FY13 Water and Sewer budgets and shown here: Combined +3.9% +5.0% Water +6.8% +2.3% Sewer +2.6% +6.2% Reserves Policy The ten -year Reading Sewer Capital plan faces some increases beginning in FY14 as previously described. Presuming that MWRA assessments increase by their predicted 8% in future years, here is suggested use of reserves an d resulting budget costs. Recall that this does not adjust for usage, so the impact on rates is not identical: Water Water Sewer Sewer Combined Reserves Net Reserves Net Net Used Budget Used Budget Budgets FY12 $SSOk. none FY13 $175k +4.7% $100k +3.1% +4.8% FY14 none -0.8% $225k +10.4% +4.8% FY15 $75k +0.3% $SOk +9.0% +4.9% FY16 $275k +2.0% $25k +7.3% +4.9% FY17 $25k +2.2% $25k +7.2% +5.0% 5- rs +8.7% +45.20/- If reserves are used in this manner and not replenished, at the end of FY17 they will be about 5% above the target levels. At this point further use for rate stabilization may not be possible, although it is likely that reserves are replenished to some degree over this period. Water and Sewer Reserves 2,250 600 2 m 1750 °0 1 500 1,250 1 000 750 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 t Water Reserves — Sewer Reserves Forecast FY13 Rates MWRA Reading MWRA Assessments According to the MWRA, their FY13 budget will be the last of a three -year commitment to keep their rate increases low during difficult economic times. They cut spending, restructured debt, and temporarily suspended commitments to growing liabilities over this period. Almost one year ago the MWRA forecast a 3.9% combined system -wide rate increase for both FY12 and FY13, followed by annual increases of almost 8% for several years afterwards. For FY13 they have released the estimates which are used in the Town's FY13 Water and Sewer budgets and shown here: Combined +3.9% +5.0% Water +6.8% +2.3% Sewer +2.6% +6.2% Reserves Policy The ten -year Reading Sewer Capital plan faces some increases beginning in FY14 as previously described. Presuming that MWRA assessments increase by their predicted 8% in future years, here is suggested use of reserves an d resulting budget costs. Recall that this does not adjust for usage, so the impact on rates is not identical: Water Water Sewer Sewer Combined Reserves Net Reserves Net Net Used Budget Used Budget Budgets FY12 $SSOk. none FY13 $175k +4.7% $100k +3.1% +4.8% FY14 none -0.8% $225k +10.4% +4.8% FY15 $75k +0.3% $SOk +9.0% +4.9% FY16 $275k +2.0% $25k +7.3% +4.9% FY17 $25k +2.2% $25k +7.2% +5.0% 5- rs +8.7% +45.20/- If reserves are used in this manner and not replenished, at the end of FY17 they will be about 5% above the target levels. At this point further use for rate stabilization may not be possible, although it is likely that reserves are replenished to some degree over this period. ",.f Y Y4 + .8 Pi tvgthtfi�. MWRA Assessments According to the MWRA, their FY13 budget will be the last of a three -year commitment to keep their rate increases low during difficult economic times. They cut spending, restructured debt, and temporarily suspended commitments to growing liabilities over this period. Almost one year ago the MWRA forecast a 3.9% combined system -wide rate increase for both FY12 and FY13, followed by annual increases of almost 8% for several years afterwards. For FY13 they have released the estimates which are used in the Town's FY13 Water and Sewer budgets and shown here: Combined +3.9% +5.0% Water +6.8% +2.3% Sewer +2.6% +6.2% Reserves Policy The ten -year Reading Sewer Capital plan faces some increases beginning in FY14 as previously described. Presuming that MWRA assessments increase by their predicted 8% in future years, here is suggested use of reserves an d resulting budget costs. Recall that this does not adjust for usage, so the impact on rates is not identical: Water Water Sewer Sewer Combined Reserves Net Reserves Net Net Used Budget Used Budget Budgets FY12 $SSOk. none FY13 $175k +4.7% $100k +3.1% +4.8% FY14 none -0.8% $225k +10.4% +4.8% FY15 $75k +0.3% $SOk +9.0% +4.9% FY16 $275k +2.0% $25k +7.3% +4.9% FY17 $25k +2.2% $25k +7.2% +5.0% 5- rs +8.7% +45.20/- If reserves are used in this manner and not replenished, at the end of FY17 they will be about 5% above the target levels. At this point further use for rate stabilization may not be possible, although it is likely that reserves are replenished to some degree over this period. d resulting budget costs. Recall that this does not adjust for usage, so the impact on rates is not identical: Water Water Sewer Sewer Combined Reserves Net Reserves Net Net Used Budget Used Budget Budgets FY12 $SSOk. none FY13 $175k +4.7% $100k +3.1% +4.8% FY14 none -0.8% $225k +10.4% +4.8% FY15 $75k +0.3% $SOk +9.0% +4.9% FY16 $275k +2.0% $25k +7.3% +4.9% FY17 $25k +2.2% $25k +7.2% +5.0% 5- rs +8.7% +45.20/- If reserves are used in this manner and not replenished, at the end of FY17 they will be about 5% above the target levels. At this point further use for rate stabilization may not be possible, although it is likely that reserves are replenished to some degree over this period. to some degree over this period. CONDUCT OF TOWN MEETING Reading's Town Meeting is conducted in accordance with the rules set down in Article 2 of the Charter and the General Bylaws. Although Town Meeting Time Third Edition is the basic source, a Town Meeting Member need only be familiar with what is contained in the Charter. These notes are intended to outline the major points all Town Meeting Members should know, and which by knowing will make Town Meeting more understandable. ORGANIZATION Town Meeting consists of 192 elected members, of which 97 constitute a quorum. ♦ There are two required sessions: The Annual Meeting in Spring which is primarily for fiscal matters and acceptance of the annual budget, and the Subsequent Meeting in November. Special Town Meetings may be called at any time that the need arises. ♦ There are three main committees which review certain Articles and advise Town Meeting of their recommendations: Finance for all expenditures of funds, Bylaw for all bylaw changes, and the Community Planning and Development Commission for all zoning changes. Their reports are given prior to discussing the motion. GENERAL RULES OF PROCEDURE The Meeting is conducted through the Warrant Articles which are presented (moved) as motions. Only one motion may be on the floor at a time; however, the motion may be amended. Often two or more Articles which address the same 259 subject may be discussed together; however, only one is formally on the floor, and each when moved is acted upon individually. Note that the vote on one may influence the others. ♦ Members who wish to speak shall rise, state their name and precinct in order to be recognized. A Member may speak for ten (10) minutes but permission must be asked to exceed this limit. Seven (7) Members can question a vote and call for a standing count, and twenty (20) can ask for a roll call vote; however, a roll call vote is seldom used because of the time it takes. PRINCIPAL MOTION ENCOUNTERED AT TOWN MEETING The following motions are the principal ones used in most cases by Town Meeting to conduct its business. Experience shows that the Members should be familiar with these. ♦ Adjourn: Ends the sessions, can be moved at any time. ♦ Recess: Stops business for a short time, generally to resolve a procedural question or to obtain information. Lay on the Table: Stops debate with the intention generally of bringing the subject up again later. May also be used to defer action on an Article for which procedurally a negative vote is undesirable. Note that tabled motions die with adjournment. Move the Previous Question: Upon acceptance by a two- thirds (2/3) vote, stops all debate and brings the subject to a vote. This is generally the main motion, or The most recent amendment, unless qualified by the mover. The reason for this as provided in Robert's Rules of Order is to allow for other amendments should they wish to be presented. Amend: Offers changes to the main motion. Must be in accordance with the motion and may not substantially alter the intent of the motion. In accordance with Robert's Rules of Order, only one primary and one secondary motion will be allowed on the floor at one time, unless specifically accepted by the Moderator. Indefinitely Postpone: Disposes of the Article without a yes or no vote. ♦ Take from the Table: Brings back a motion which was previously laid on the table. ♦ Main Motion: The means by which a subject is brought before the Meeting. THE FOLLOWING MOTIONS MAY BE USED BY A MEMBER FOR THE PURPOSE NOTED: 260 Question of Privilege: Sometimes used to offer a resolution. Should not be used to "steal" the floor. Point of Order: To raise a question concerning the conduct of the Meeting. Point of Information: To ask for information relevant to the business at hand. MULTIPLE MOTIONS SUBSEQUENT (MULTIPLE) MOTIONS If the subsequent motion to be offered, as distinct from an amendment made during debate, includes material which has previously been put to a vote and defeated, it will be viewed by the Moderator as reconsideration and will not be accepted. If the subsequent motion contains distinctly new material which is within the scope of the Warrant Article, then it will be accepted. An example of this latter situation is successive line items of an omnibus budget moved as a block. SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONSIDERATIONS ♦ The maker of any .proposed multiple motion shall make their intent known, and the content of the motion to be offered shall be conveyed to the Moderator - prior to the initial calling of the Warrant Article. ♦ Once an affirmative vote has been taken on the motion then on the floor - no further subsequent alternative motions will be accepted. (Obviously does not apply to the budget, for example.) ♦ Also - There can only be one motion on the floor at any one time. You have the ability to offer amendments to the motion that is on the floor. You also have the ability to move for reconsideration. TOWN OF READING BYLAWS ARTICLE 2: TOWN MEETINGS 2.1 General Section 2.1.1 The Annual Town Meeting shall be held on the third Tuesday preceding the second Monday in April of each year for the election of Town Officers and for other such matters as required by law to be determined by ballot. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in any year in which presidential electors are to be elected, the Board of Selectmen may schedule the commencement of the Annual Town Meeting for the same date designated as the date to hold the Presidential Primary. Section 2.1.2 The polls for the Annual Town Meeting shall be opened at 7:00 a.m. and shall remain open until 8:00 p.m. Section 2.1.3 All business of the Annual Town Meeting, except the election of such Town officers and the determination of such matters as required by law to be elected or determined by ballot, shall be considered at an adjournment of such meeting to be held at 7:30 p.m. on the second Monday in April, except if this day shall fall on a legal holiday, in which case the Meeting shall be held on the following day or at a further adjournment thereof. Section 2.1.4 A Special Town Meeting called the Sub- sequent Town Meeting shall be held on the second Monday in November, 261 except if this day shall fall on a legal holiday, in which case the Meeting shall be held on the following day. The Subsequent Town Meeting shall consider and act on all business as may properly come before it except the adoption of the annual operating budget. Section 2.1.5 Adjourned sessions of every Annual Town Meeting after the first such adjourned session provided for in Section 2.1.3 of this Article and all sessions of every Subsequent Town Meeting, shall be held on the following Thursday at 7:30 p.m. and then on the following Monday at 7:30 p.m. and on consecutive Mondays and Thursdays, unless a resolution to adjourn to another time is adopted by a majority vote of the Town Meeting Members present and voting. Section 2.1.6 The Board of Selectmen shall give notice of the Annual, Subsequent or any Special Town Meeting at least fourteen (14) days prior to the time of holding said Meeting by causing an attested copy of the Warrant calling the same to be posted in one (1) or more public places in each precinct of the Town, and either causing such attested copy to be published in a local newspaper or providing in a manner such as electronic submission, holding for pickup, or mailing, an attested copy of said Warrant to each Town Meeting Member. Section 2.1.7 All Articles for the Annual Town Meeting shall be submitted to the Board of Selectmen not later than 8:00 p.m. on the fifth Tuesday preceding the date of election of Town officers unless this day is a holiday in which case the following day shall be substituted. All Articles for the Subsequent Town Meeting shall be submitted to the Board of Selectmen not later than 8:00 p.m. on the fifth Tuesday preceding the Subsequent Town Meeting in which action is to be taken, unless this day is a holiday, in which case the following day shall be substituted. Section 2.1.8 The Board of Selectmen, after drawing a Warrant for a Town Meeting, shall immediately deliver a copy of such Warrant to each Member of the Finance Committee, the Community Planning and Development Commission, the Bylaw Committee and the Moderator. 2.2 Conduct of Town Meetings Section 2.2.1 In the conduct of all Town Meetings, the following rules shall be observed: Rule 1: A majority of the Town Meeting Members shall constitute a quorum for doing business. Rule 2: All Articles on the Warrant shall be taken up in the order of their arrangement in the Warrant, unless otherwise decided by a majority vote of the Members present and voting. Rule 3: Prior to debate on each Article in a Warrant involving the expenditure of money, the Finance Committee shall advise the Town Meeting as to its recommendations and the reasons therefore. Rule 4: Prior to a debate on each Article in a Warrant involving changes in the Bylaw or Charter, petitions for a special act, or local acceptance by Town Meeting of. a State statute, the Bylaw Committee shall advise the Town Meeting as to its recommendations and reasons therefore. 262 Rule 5: Every person shall stand when speaking, shall respectfully address the Moderator, shall not speak until recognized by the Moderator, shall state his name and precinct, shall confine himself to the question under debate and shall-avoid all personalities. - - Rule 6: No person shall be privileged to speak or make a motion until after he has been recognized by the Moderator. Rule 7: No Town Meeting Member or other person shall speak on any question more than ten (10) minutes without first obtaining the permission of the Meeting. Rule 8: Any non -Town Meeting Member may speak at a Town Meeting having first identified himself to the Moderator. A proponent of an Article may speak on such Article only after first identifying himself to the Moderator and obtaining permission of Town Meeting to speak. No non -Town Meeting Member shall speak on any question more than five (5) minutes without first obtaining the permission of the Meeting. Non - Town Meeting Members shall be given the privilege of "speaking at Town Meetings only after all Town Meeting Members who desire to speak upon the question under consideration have first been given an opportunity to do,so. Rule 9: Members of official bodies who are not Town Meeting Members shall have the same right to speak, but not to vote, as Town Meeting Members on all matters relating to their official bodies. Rule 10: No speaker at a Town Meeting shall be interrupted except by a Member making a point of order or privileged motion or by the Moderator. Rule 11: Any person having a monetary or equitable interest in any matter under discussion at a Town Meeting and any person employed by another having such an interest, shall disclose the fact of his interest or his employer's interest before speaking thereon. Rule 12: The Moderator shall decide all questions of order subject to appeal to the meeting, the question on which appeal shall be taken before any other. Rule 13: When a question is put, the vote on all matters shall be taken by a show of hands, and the Moderator shall declare the vote as it appears to him. If the Moderator is unable to decide the vote by the show of hands, or if his decision is immediately questioned by seven (7) or more members, he shall determine the question by ordering a standing vote and he shall appoint tellers to make and return the count directly to him. On request of not less than twenty (20) members, a vote shall be taken by roll call. Rule 14: All original main motions having to do with the expenditure of money shall be presented in writing, and all other motions shall be in writing if so directed by the Moderator. Rule 15: No motion shall be received and put until it is seconded. No motion made and seconded shall be withdrawn' if any Member objects. No amendment not relevant to the subject of the original motion shall be entertained. Rule 16: When a question is under debate, no motion shall be in order except (1) to adjourn, (2) to lay on the table or pass over, (3) to postpone for a certain time, (4) to commit, (5) to amend, (6) to postpone indefinitely or (7) to fix a time for terminating debate and putting the question, and the afore- 263 said several motions shall have precedence in the order in which they stand arranged in this Rule. Rule 17: Motions to adjourn (except when balloting for offices and when votes are-being taken) shall always-be first in order. Motions to adjourn, to move the question, to lay on the table and to take from the table shall be decided without debate. Rule 18: The previous question shall be put in the following form or in some other form having the same meaning: "Shall the main question now be put ?," and until this question is decided all debate on the main question shall be suspended. If the previous question be adopted, the sense of the meeting shall immediately be taken upon any pending amendments in the order inverse to that in which they were moved except that the largest sum or the longest time shall be put first, and finally upon the main question. Rule 19: The duties of the Moderator and the conduct and method of proceeding at all Town Meetings, not prescribed by law or by rules set forth in this Article, shall be determined by rules of practice set forth in Town Meeting Time Third Edition except that to lay on the table shall require a majority vote. Section 222 It shall be the duty of every official body, by a Member thereof, to be in attendance at all Town Meetings for the information thereof while any subject matter is under consideration affecting such official body. Section 2.2.3 All committees authorized by Town Meeting shall be appointed by the Moderator unless otherwise ordered by a vote of the Members present and voting. All committees shall report as directed by the Town Meeting. If no report is made within a year after the appointment, the committee shall be discharged unless, in the meantime,- the Town Meeting grants an extension of time. — When - the final report of a committee is placed in the hands of the Moderator, it shall be deemed to be received, and a vote to accept the same shall discharge the committee but shall not be equivalent to a vote to adopt it. Section 2.2.4 Motion to Reconsider 2.2.4.1 A motion to reconsider any vote must be made before the final adjournment of the Meeting at which the vote was passed but such motion to reconsider shall not be made at an adjourned meeting unless the mover has given notice of his intention to make such a motion, either at the session of the meeting at which the vote was passed or by written notice to the Town Clerk within twenty -four (24) hours after the adjournment of such session. When such motion is made at the session of the meeting at which the vote was passed, said motion shall be accepted by the Moderator but consideration thereof shall be postponed to become the first item to be considered at the next session unless all remaining Articles have been disposed of, in which case reconsideration shall be considered before final adjournment. There can be no reconsideration of a vote once reconsidered or after a vote not to reconsider. Reconsideration may be ordered by a vote of two- thirds (2/3) of the votes present. Arguments for or against reconsideration may include discussion of the motion being reconsidered providing such discussion consists only of relevant facts or arguments not previously presented by any speaker. 2.2.4.2 The foregoing provisions relating to motions to reconsider shall not apply to any such motion made by the Board of Selectmen and authorized by the Moderator as necessary for the reconsideration of actions previously --taken by Town Meeting by reason of- -- State or Federal action or inaction or other circumstances not within the control of the Town or Town Meeting. 264 In the event such a motion to reconsider is made and authorized, said motion may be made at any time before the final adjournment of the Meeting at which the vote was passed, said motion may be made even if the vote was already reconsidered, or was the subject of a vote not to reconsider and reconsideration may be ordered by a vote of two - thirds (2/3) of the votes present. 2.2.4.3 Notice of every vote to be reconsidered at an adjourned Town Meeting shall be posted by the Town Clerk in one (1) or more public places in each precinct of the Town as soon as possible after adjournment, and he shall, if practicable, at least one (1) day before the time of the next following session of said Adjourned Meeting, publish such notice in some newspaper published in the Town. Said notice shall include the vote to be reconsidered and the place and time of the next following session of said Adjourned Meeting. The foregoing notice provisions shall not apply when a motion to reconsider any Town Meeting action is made publicly at Town Meeting before the adjournment of any session of any Adjourned Town Meeting. Section 2.2.5 The Selectmen shall, at each Annual Town Meeting, give to the Members information of the State of the Town. Section 2.2.6 The Town Meeting Members and Town Meeting Members -Elect from each precinct shall hold an annual precinct meeting after the Annual Town Election but before the convening of the business sessions of- the - Annual Town Meeting. The purpose of the meeting shall be the election of a Chairman and a Clerk and to conduct whatever business may be appropriate. Chairman shall serve no more than six (6) consecutive years in that position. Additional precinct meetings may be called by the Chairman or by a petition of six (6) Town Meeting Members of the precinct. Section 2.2.7 Removal of Town Meeting Members 2.2.7.1 The Town Clerk shall mail, within thirty (30) days after the adjournment sine die of a Town Meeting, to every Town Meeting Member who has attended less than one half (1/2) of the Town Meeting sessions since the most recent Annual Town Election, a record of his attendance and a copy of Section 2 -6 of the Charter. 2.2.7.2 Town Meeting Members of each precinct shall consider at a precinct meeting to be conducted in accordance with Section 2.2.6 of these Bylaws and Section 2 -6 of the Charter, preceding the consideration of the Article placed upon the Annual Town Meeting Warrant in accordance with Section 2 -6 of the Charter, the names of Town Meeting Members in that precinct appearing on said Warrant Article and adopt recommendations to Town Meeting as to what action should be taken regarding each such Member. The Chairman of each precinct or his designee shall make such recommendations along with supporting evidence and rationale to Town Meeting. 265 2.2.7.3 The names of the Members subject to removal in accordance with Section 2 -6 of the Charter shall be grouped by precinct in the Warrant Article required by said Section. Section 2.2.8 Meetinqs During Town Meeting No appointed or elected board, commission, committee or other entity of Town Government shall schedule or conduct any hearing, meeting or other function during any hours in which an Annual, Subsequent or Special Town Meeting is in session or is scheduled to be in session. Any such board, commission or committee which schedules or holds a meeting or hearing on the same calendar day but at a time prior to a session of Town Meeting shall adjourn or recess not less than five (5) minutes prior to the scheduled session of Town Meeting. Any Board, Commission or Committee may, at the opening of any session of Town Meeting, present to that Town Meeting an instructional motion requesting an exemption from this Bylaw and asking that Town Meeting permit it to meet at a date and hour at which a future session of Town Meeting is scheduled and may present reasons for Town Meeting to give such permission. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any board, commission or committee which meets the requirements of Section 23B of Chapter 39 of the General Laws concerning emergency meetings may, upon meeting such requirements, conduct such a meeting or hearing at a time scheduled for a Town Meeting. Town of Reading 16 Lowell Street Reading, MA 01867 -2685 FAX: (781) 942 -9070 TOWN CLERK Website: www.readingma.gov (781) 942 -9050 Town Meeting Handout Guidelines To ensure that all Town Meeting members have access to the same information, distributed in the same manner, please follow the below listed guidelines for handout materials: Materials that are prepared by a Town Board / Committee / Town Department must include the following: • Article name and number • Name of Town Board / Committee / Commission or Town Department • Date the document was created • Contact Information • Approval of Town Clerk's Office Materials that are prepared by petitioners or other voters must include the following: • Article name and number • Contact information of person who created handout • Date the document was created • Approval of Town Clerk's Office All handouts: . • Must contain facts only unless specifically stating "This is the opinion of • Should be on white paper only • Should be double -sided copies if more than one page • May be distributed only by giving adequate copies for all Town Meeting members (192) to the Town Clerk or designee by 6:30 PM on the night in which the subject article will be discussed • All handouts not approved will be removed and recycled • All handouts not distributed must be picked up at the end of each night or they will be recycled at the end of each night. All PowerPoint Presentations: • Must consult with the Town Clerk before the meeting • Provide a copy before the meeting • All presentations will be given using the Town of Reading laptop computer February of 2010 266