HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-04-07-AC-MIN.pdf APPROPRIATION COMMITTEE MEETING
MONDAY,APRIL 7, 2003, NATIONAL HERITAGE MUSEUM, 7:00 P.M.
Present:
D Brown, R Pawliczek, K Dooks, E Michelson, S Spector, R Eurich, A Levine, P
Hamburger, J Ryan
• Discussion of the amendment to be offered by D McKenna and P Kelley
(04/07/03) that would eliminate the Solid Waste/Recycling Coordinator position
in order to fund the two additions to the operating budget, weekly recycling
($36,760) and website support ($13,700)
• The SWRC position is fully funded from a state grant
• In order to retain the grant certain reporting requirements must be fulfilled.
Concern over who would in fact be available to do said reporting.
• AC would like to have made available a job description and information that
would assist in understanding what the daily duties of the position require.
• SWRC is responsible for brokering tonnage. With a successful recycling program
there is a concern that the Town will not meet it's GAT commitment. If that were
to happen the SWRC is responsible for brokering tonnage in order to minimize
the financial exposure of the Town. Could the Town assign the duties to someone
else within the DPW? Other duties include regional hazardous waste site
oversight, CRT collection etc.
• Discussed concern that these additions were done outside the agreed to process.
• Discussed concern that if additions were to remain intact there could be some
possible erosion of support of the major boards and committees for the operating
override.
• Discussion that this appears to be micro managing the DPW. Perhaps a cut should
be recommended of$58,600 and leave it up to the DPW Director to determine
what will be cut.
• Discussion of the L Wood proposal. D Brown will attempt to put together the
reasoning for not supporting the proposal, such as, late in the process, violates the
intent of the process, don't necessarily agree with the solution, destroys the
concept of a bottoms up budget creation an does not identify what services might
be lost.
• P Hamburger distributed and discussed potential results of a zero %increase in
wages for Fiscal 2005 with an optimistic, neutral and pessimistic scenario.
• Discussion on possible results of the amount of the override increasing to
something greater than $4.957 million. All boards and committees had agreed on
the process. If the amendment were to pass would support for the override erode?
Would an increase put the override question in jeopardy?
• C Hornig(CEC) stated that the CEC is opposed to Article 16, Skate Board Park.
A minority on the committee supports an appropriation of$25,000 from"free
cash"
• AC "straw vote"to support putting the additions (weekly recycle and web
support) on the override. 2 Yes 6 No 1 Absent