HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-04-06 SB-minSELECT BOARD MEETING
Monday, April 6, 2026
A meeting of the Lexington Select Board was called to order at 6:30p.m. on Monday, April 6, 2026, via a
hybrid meeting platform. Ms. Hai, Chair; Mr. Pato, Vice Chair; Mr. Sandeen, Mr. Lucente, and Ms.
Kumar were present, as well as Town Manager, Mr. Bartha; Deputy Town Manager, Ms. Axtell; and
Department Assistant, Ms. Lino.
Chair Hai called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION
1. 2026 Annual Town Meeting Select Board Article Discussion and Positions
Regarding Article 4, Ms. Hai explained that the Board adjourned last week after tabling Article 4,
following an amendment presented from the floor which proposed removing 50% of the unallocated free
cash and moving it into the School's operating budget. After caucuses on the floor, each Financial
Committee and the Select Board voted unanimous opposition to the amendment, while the School
Committee supported the amendment, despite the School Committee’s previous report of unanimous
support for the budget as presented. Yesterday, the School Committee posted a 31-page memo from the
Superintendent stating the School Committee had its unanimous support. She noted that there was no
posted School Committee meeting between last Monday and now.
Mr. Lucente stated that his position has not changed since the last time the Board spoke. He expressed
that his biggest fear is how this could impact the Town long range, as it heads into the largest borrowing
in the history of Lexington and potentially in the history of Massachusetts for a municipality. This is not
something to take lightly.
Ms. Kosnoff explained that for an issuance of this size, the Town will absolutely need to obtain two
ratings.
Ms. Kumar stated that the point is not whether Moody's will lower the Town’s rating this year or next
year, but rather if this particular action will lower the Town’s overall rating and credit worthiness. This is
a shift from the very strong financial discipline that the Town has had for several years which gives
confidence to the rating agencies.
Mr. Pato stated that he shares the concerns previously expressed by other Board members. It appears that
some of the documents submitted seem to be generated by automation and these can lead to
misunderstandings. He views moving forward with this amendment as risky for the Town. The
appropriate discipline to implement at this point is to adopt Article four, as is.
Mr. Sandeen stated that he agrees with the rest of the Select Board members’ position on this issue.
Generally someone requesting $1.25M at Town Meeting must explain what it will be used for. He stated
that it would be premature to make a recommendation until we know how the funds might be used. In
addition, a 1% increase in bond interest rates on $550 million would result in a $112 million impact over
30 years. Putting $112M at risk for $1.25M seems concerning. Educational excellence in a fiscally
responsible manner is important, and this means understanding how the money would be spent and what
the implications of both scenarios would be.
Mr. Bartha stated that staff viewed this as a reckless proposal last Monday. Despite the volume of
information since, staff continue to view it as a reckless proposal. Professional staff worked for eight
months during the Finance Summits on a number of items. Staff discussed explicitly during the budget
process wanting to keep $2.5M in unencumbered funds available for the uncertainty that the Town is
facing. The amendment cleverly cuts that in half and states that this is a conservative proposal. It is
unclear how those funds would be spent.The municipal committees lose sight into decisions made once
the School budget is appropriated. The Town is in a robust reserve position today. The Town has built
that reserve over many years in anticipation of the largest borrowing in the Town's history.When the
Capital Stabilization Fund is completely expended, as planned in the first period of debt service, the Town
will be below where it should be from a fund balance perspective.It is deceptive to say that the Town has
a healthy fund balance which can therefore be utilized to insert into the operating budget.
Ms. Hai stated that it appears the Board’s position has not changed. The Board retains a significant level
of discomfort in the information that has been released and questions remain. It appears the Board
supports this Article not coming off the table this evening and instead taking it up at a later date. Mr. Pato
suggested that the Budget Summit could be convened in order to discuss this information in depth.
The Board discussed its positions on various Articles.
Article 6 FY26 Operating, Enterprise & CPA Budget Amendment: Mr. Sandeen updated his
position to a yes.
Article 25 Residential Development Surcharge: Mr. Sandeen updated his position to a yes. Ms.
Hai and Ms. Kumar updated their positions to a no.
Article 26: Mr. Sandeen updated his position to a no.
Article 27 Procurement for Online Capital Project Platform: Mr. Sandeen, Mr. Lucente, and Ms.
Kumar updated their positions to a no.
Art 27 Parker amendment: Mr. Sandeen, Mr. Lucente, and Ms. Kumar updated their positions to a
yes.
Art 27 Kaufman amendment to Parker Amendment: Mr. Lucente and Ms. Kumar updated their
positions to a no. Mr. Sandeen updated his position to a yes.
Article 28 Walnut Street Speed Hump: Ms. Hai remained a no. Mr. Lucente remained a wait.
Article 31: Mr. Sandeen updated his position to a yes.
DOCUMENTS: Art 6 motion posted 3.19.pdf; Art 25. Revised Motion posted 3.17.26.pdf; Art 27 online
procurement platform motion revised 03.02.26.pdf; Parker Amendment Article 27. posted 3.30.26.pdf;
Kaufman Amendment to Parker amendment. posted 3.30.26.docx; Working Document - Select Board
Positions
ADJOURN
VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Select Board voted by roll call 5-0 to adjourn at
6:55p.m.
A true record; Attest:
Kristan Patenaude
Recording Secretary