Tear down these schools

“If you seek new school projects, if you seek increased taxes for Longmeadow residents, if you seek financial ruin: Come here, to this town.  Ms. Katherine Craven, tear down these schools.”

This quote is adapted from a famous Presidential speech to be used in a future speech by Armand Wray (or the next SC chair) in 2011 about the new Glenbrook/ Williams Middle School building projects.

I’m sure that the Longmeadow School Committee (or a future School Building Committee) will be able to point out a crumbling wall or two (like the crack in the northwest corner of LHS) that will convince Ms. Craven and the MSBA of the need to build two (or one larger) new middle school(s) in Longmeadow.

Last night’s SB meeting was evidence to the agenda of the Longmeadow School Committee and certain members of the Select Board.  If you didn’t watch last night’s discussion regarding the MSBA “statements of interest” (SOIs) for our middle schools, you should take 30 minutes at 7 PM tonight to watch the rebroadcast.  I understand the first 10 minutes of the discussion (which were not broadcast last night due to technical problems) will also be aired tonight.

Here are statements from the first section of both SOIs…

The following priorities have been included in the SOI:

1. Replacement or renovation of a building which is structurally unsound or
   otherwise in a condition seriously jeopardizing the health and safety of school children where no alternative exists.
2. Elimination of existing severe overcrowding.

It may sound like the health and well being of our middle school children and teachers are being jeopardized, but according to the SC + superintendent comments, this language  is necessary (even if untrue) in the SOI in order to get a high project priority!! 

Last night was supposed to be a simple SC/SB joint meeting for the SB to approve the SOI’s which are due January 26 at 5 PM.  Comments by Swanson and Gold pointed out a large number of factual errors (not minor) and both SB members appear to be unwilling to sign an official town document containing such errors.  It turns out that the MSBA notified the School Superintendent last June that Longmeadow’s SOIs needed to be updated.  The deadline is about to pass with some lame excuse that the MSBA system has changed and that is why the documents are being submitted at the last minute.  There was not a satisfactory explanation as to why the SOIs were not accurate.

The SB agreed to continue their joint meeting tonight at 6 PM in an effort to resolve the errors and be able to submit an accurate SOI before the deadline passes.  It will be interesting to see what happens.   

BTW… the meeting is not being videotaped so you will need to attend the meeting at 6 PM at the Police Dept Community Room if you want to view the proceedings.

Longmeadow Demographics

According to the 2010 Longmeadow census, there are a total of 5,406 town residents over the age of 55 and a large segment (2,763) between the ages of 45-54.  

Our town has an aging population (like most towns) and the need for senior services and facilities is likely to increase not decrease over the next 10 years.

In the same way as it is possible to predict the school age population for future years, the demographics of our aging population can be estimated using some basic assumptions. Our town should consider our entire town demographics (not just the school age population) when planning for the future.

Below is a chart that shows the change in our town demographics between 2000 and 2010.  You will see that there was a significant increase in the number of town residents over the age of 55 (4,550 --> 5,406, an increase of 18.8% or 856 people!)

click here to enlarge chart

The above data shows that an estimated 48% of Longmeadow taxpayers are over 55 (assuming that most of the 0-24 segment are not likely to be taxpayers).

There is also a large segment of the current Longmeadow population that is between 45-54 and within the next ten years will likely significantly increase the percentage of our population that is over 55 years of age.   

Here come the baby boomers!

Between 2000 and 2010 there was a significant decrease in the number of residents in the 25-44 age group. (3,440 --> 3,162) while the number of school aged residents has increased (4,909 --> 5,210).

Towns including East Longmeadow, West Springfield, Chicopee, Westfield, Springfield, Palmer, Agawam, Granby, Holyoke and others have built new facilities, renovated or updated existing facilities or are considering new facilities for their senior services. They have recognized the need and are doing something about it.

The Longmeadow Select Board should not consider actions in the coming budget cycle that will reduce senior services in order to cut town government expenses.  Longmeadow should increase the commitment to senior services and include a major renovation or new facility for our seniors in our long range capital plan. 

Our town leaders should consider the needs for all town residents- not just the school age segment when planning for the future.

IT Consolidation- Final Comments

At the Select Board meeting on December 6 there will likely be a vote for the consolidation of Longmeadow's town wide IT resources under the auspices of the School Department and School Committee.  There have been a couple of prior posts about this subject (see IT Consolidation- Part I, IT Consolidation- Part II) as well as a SB public hearing on November 15.

At this public hearing there were many comments from town residents both for and against the proposal. Some opposed the IT consolidation because it would require changing the Town Charter while other people objected that the school department should not be burdened with a broadening scope of their primary goals.

Tim Topitizer, a town resident and also a professional in the Information Technologies industry and with some prior involvement with the town's IT needs spoke against the proposed organization change.  Mr. Topitizer asked why there was no strategic plan for the proposed consolidation and that there should be an assessment across all town and school departments looking at present and future needs before a consolidation takes place.  I thought that his comments were right on target!

Below is a short video clip courtesy of LCTV with Mr. Topitizer's comments...




Consolidating the town's IT resources into a single function for a more effective use of our budget monies is a goal that most people agree is a good idea.

However, the town's IT effort has been under resourced for many years.  Town Manager Robin Crosbie has managed to conduct town government business with only one full time IT employee + some occasional support from the School Department.  With this proposed IT consolidation Ms. Crosbie will no longer have IT resources in the town government organization and will have to rely upon the School Superintendent and the new IT department to properly prioritize projects. 

If this IT organization change occurs, I would still expect that the Town Manager to have IT goals and responsibilities even though the required resources will not be direct reports.

Our town has historically been financially limited in most budget areas and this is not likely to change in the foreseeable future. I am not concerned with line item transfers from the new IT dept for other school uses... but I am concerned that the business of our town and its residents may be compromised if the School Department and the School Committee must choose between educating our students (their primary mission) and all of the other IT needs for the town.

Rob Aseltine states that if this IT consolidation is to occur, it cannot be done under Town Government because of a recent Federal ruling by the US Dept of Education which prohibits IT consolidation of school dept resources outside the auspicies of the school dept.  SB member Gold states that East Longmeadow has already completed their IT consolidation under town government.  So it would appear that this issue is not clear.

I would urge the Select Board to defer this vote until a strategic plan and town/school wide assessment of needs is completed.

IT Consolidation- Part II

Read the first post on this subject- IT Consolidation, Part I

I believe that effective use of computer technology and related systems is one of the important keys to our long term success as a town. Many corporations have successfully navigated recent turbulent economic times through innovative use of technology. Productivity gains leading to lower costs can be achieved through effective deployment of new capital (+ employee training) particularly for computer technology related systems.

Various computer technologies and systems are involved in many aspects of our town government ranging from the Finance Department, Town Clerk and Assessor’s offices, Storrs Library, DPW and Police/ Fire Departments.

Technology is vitally important to the success of the education process in Longmeadow as well.

As a town we do some things well and other things not so well.

The installation of the new water meters with transmitters that allow the town to collect and bill town residents in a much faster and more efficient manner is but one small example of how technology can help the town reduce costs and achieve our long term goals.

Our town wide high speed phone system can effectively inform town residents (or a group of town residents) about an emergency or situation in a very short time and is another good example of what we are doing well.

In contrast to those examples, original property records in the Assessor's Office are 20th century technology at best. If you have needed to review the details of your original property record at Town Hall, you will find that the town still uses paper records. Let’s hope that the piece of paper for your original plot plan is never lost or misplaced. Check with East Longmeadow and other surrounding towns and you will find that they utilize an online GIS system which provides a wealth of information for homeowners and other interested parties. I suspect that there may be significant cost reduction and/or service improvement opportunities in this area.

We need more training for all of our town employees including teachers to effectively utilize the technology resources that we already have and for each town employee to become more productive in the workplace.

The list of technology needs in our town are great…

It is more than new computers, wireless networking and new software for our school system. Police, Fire, Town Hall, Storrs Library all have opportunities and needs that could reduce costs and provide new services that must be considered when allocating our limited financial resources.

Without regular (or annual) Proposition 2½ overrides Longmeadow will always be required to prioritize its needs. Technology equipment and resources will become an ever increasing demand on our limited resources.

Armand Wray, School Committee chair cited a “memorandum of understanding” (MOU) between the SC and SB at this week’s SC meeting. It stated that the proposed new IT department’s budget will not be subject to “line item” transfer of funds to other school department needs.

That is not my concern…. The primary mission of the School Superintendent and the Longmeadow SC is the education of our children.   Adding the additional responsibility for the broad scope of the town’s IT needs just doesn’t make sense.

The issue of "student privacy" being used as a reason for consolidating the IT department under the School Department is a "red herring".  The Police and Fire Departments already have rigid security requirements under Homeland Security so the issue is not unique within our town.

From Wikipedia… Information Systems (IS) is an academic/ professional discipline concerned with the strategic, managerial and operational activities involved in the gathering, processing, storing, distributing and use of information, and its associated technologies, in society and organizations.

I recommend that the Longmeadow Select Board consider creation of a new separate department under Town Government called Information Systems and not simply consolidate the current town and school IT efforts under the auspices of the Longmeadow School Department.

There will be a Select Board hearing on Monday, November 15 at 8 PM to hear public comments regarding the consolidation of the school and town IT departments under the School Department. This public hearing is required because a change in the Town Charter is required.

While it would appear that the Aseltine-Barkett-Swanson majority is in favor of this change and this hearing is only a formality, I would urge all concerned residents to attend the meeting and voice their opposition to this town charter change.

Note: If you are interested in adding your comments, simply send them with your name and address to longmeadowbuzz@comcast.net.

A New “Game plan” for FY12?

At the Select Board meeting on August 23 there was a series of discussions that appeared to be directed at developing a new “game plan” for the upcoming FY12 budget process (see recent Buzz post- Select Board Sets FY12 Goals for meeting details).

I believe that there is a high probability that the new “Aseltine-Barkett-Swanson (A-B-S) majority” will attempt to “marginalize” and negate the influence of both Gold and Santaniello during the upcoming FY12 budget setting process.

Here are some highlights from the recent SB goal setting meeting that led me to this conclusion….

1. The formation of a financial “subcommittee” (similar to that employed by the School Committee) was proposed to assist with the development of the town’s annual budget and with other financial issues that face the SB. Aseltine and Barkett both expressed dissatisfaction with last year’s budget process and wanted to change the methodology.
   
   This new subcommittee would "assist" the Town Manager by setting specific goals and then helping to work out the details. It would consist of only 2 SB members since 3 or more would represent a board quorum. SB members who are not on this subcommittee could attend as town residents but would not be able to participate directly.
   
   [The Town Charter states that the Town Manager not the Select Board nor this proposed SB financial subcommittee has the prime responsibility for developing a town wide budget including the school department. So what exactly will be the role of this new financial subcommittee?]
   
   
2. Barkett also expressed a desire to rein in the activities of any “rogue” board members (was he referring to Gold + Santaniello?) who might directly interact with department heads to ask budget or other related questions. Aseltine and Barkett both favored a new SB protocol that required all information requests or questions be channeled through the SB chair and then through the Town Manager who would then ask the Dept. Head for the information. If such a protocol is adopted, members who are not on the proposed SB financial subcommittee will likely have a much more difficult time accessing budget related information since they will not be able to directly ask town department heads (Finance Director, DPW Director, Fire Chief, etc.).

During last year’s budget process, Gold was a key player in developing a FY11 budget compromise that balanced the needs of our town and which was approved at the Annual Town Meeting. He played an important role in the negotiation of a new trash collection contract that significantly reduced costs and improved service. He also identified an opportunity for a subsidized energy conservation program for town buildings that will significantly reduce energy costs.

It’s interesting that both Aseltine and Barkett voted against the FY11 budget that was approved at the Annual Town Meeting. At the time of the SB budget vote Aseltine stated that he thought the proposed town side of the budget did not go far enough in cutting town employee headcounts, increasing outsourcing or improving the sustainability of the town side of the budget for future years.

I believe that this new game plan (formation of a financial subcommittee + adoption of new information request protocol) that is supported by the A-B-S majority will be used as a strategy to marginalize the efforts of both Gold and Santaniello and shift the town’s financial resources towards the school side of the budget.

Barkett and Swanson are also the co-chairs for the School Building Committee and each has a large important commitment to the new high school project in addition to being SB members. It would seem prudent for the SB to appoint Gold and/or Santaniello to this financial subcommittee given the large amount of work involved in developing the town budget.

I hope that my speculations are proven wrong and I will watch to see what happens….

I strongly recommend that all town residents stay tuned as well.

Select Board Goal Setting Meeting

On Monday, August 23 starting at 6 PM, the Longmeadow Select Board will conduct an "offsite" goal setting meeting in the parlor of the First Church of Christ at 763 Longmeadow Street in Longmeadow.   As I understand it, LCTV has been asked not to televise this session. 

It is interesting that the majority of the Select Board (Aseltine, Barkett and Swanson) want this meeting to be "off camera" so that process of goal setting and priority setting can be "more focused and relaxed". Gold and Santaniello want the meeting to be taped for later broadcast.

Ms. Swanson noted that with the new open meeting law meeting minutes must be more "robust" than previously required so that there is a mechanism by which town residents can be informed.  [However, it should be noted that Select Board meeting minutes have not been posted for about 2 months and the School Building Committee has not posted its meeting minutes for 5 months.]

Below is a video clip of last night's SB discussion on the subject of taping next week's meeting...

According to OPEN MEETING LAW, G.L. c. 30A, §§ 18-25 (Effective July 1, 2010)...

section 20e: (e) After notifying the chair of the public body, any person may make a video or audio recording of an open session of a meeting of a public body, or may transmit the meeting through any medium, subject to reasonable requirements of the chair as to the number, placement and operation of equipment used so as not to interfere with the conduct of the meeting. At the beginning of the meeting the chair shall inform other attendees of any such recordings.

Chairman Aseltine cited that this was an important session for the Select Board and he invited all interested town residents to attend this meeting.  [I just hope that the church parlor is large enough.]

Conflict of Interest?

The Longmeadow.org webmaster (that’s me) was charged last month in a series of emails from Rob Aseltine as having a serious conflict of interest by being the town webmaster and posting of personal opinion here on the Longmeadow Buzz blog. Mr. Aseltine’s contention was that these personal opinions affected what I was willing to post with regard to the high school building project on the town website.

During last week’s Select Board meeting (7/12/10), Mr. Barkett cited visible links to the LongmeadowBuzz blog on the town website as both “confusing to the public” and “unvetted opinion”. For Mr. Barkett’s edification there are also very prominent links on the town website to LCTV…. and anyone who decides to follow them will be quickly led to the LCTV's program videos of “Put Up Your Duqs” (PUYD) by Jerold Duquette- the content of which certainly meets the same criteria. Should we also remove the LCTV link from the town website?

This past week Mr. Aseltine demanded that all links to the LongmeadowBuzz blog be removed from Longmeadow.org as soon as possible and they were removed without objection. Interestingly enough, the LongmeadowBuzz blog has been in existence for over 2½ years and this is first time that any directive about the links has been given by the Select Board.

In support of Mr. Aseltine’s “conflict of interest” assertion, Christine Swanson- co-chair of the SBC outlined one “example” during last week’s SB discussion that involved a delay in posting event information relating to a planned School Building Committee tour of Longmeadow HS.

From my webmaster email records, here is the timeline...

1. SBC request by Ms. Swanson- Thursday night, May 13 at 10:58 PM
2. Second request asking why the announcement had not yet been posted- Saturday night at 6:05 PM
3. Email response by webmaster on Sunday night at 9:33 PM indicating that he was out of town at a family wedding starting Thursday morning and would post the announcement Monday morning.
4. Announcement was posted on the Longmeadow.org homepage, the SBC website and the Town Calendar on Monday morning at 10 AM for maximum visibility.

Perhaps, better planning by the SBC and Ms. Swanson would have provided greater lead time for publicizing this event. Even if the town website was “professionally managed” as is being suggested, it is not likely that Ms. Swanson would have received a quicker response. This is a pretty weak example of a significant “conflict of interest”.

As far as I am aware there have been no incidents which will show that I censored, filtered or refused to post any school building project related documents on the SBC or town websites. In one example refuting this accusation, I worked very diligently trying to obtain SBC meeting minutes so that they could be posted on the SBC website in a timely manner to keep town residents updated about this important project. However, in many cases, there were delays of up to 3 months before SBC meeting minutes were sent to me for posting despite my numerous requests for them.

All information "above and beyond" what was expected was posted on the School Building Committee website in a timely fashion. My personal opinions expressed here on the Buzz did not influence this effort.

As I have mentioned in prior posts, it was the posting of the November 2009 MSBA/ SBC correspondence on the Buzz (Now is the time!) that caused this latest town website controversy. In a Springfield-Channel 3 interview on June 3, 2010,  Jahn Hart, Superintendent of Schools stated that these letters had been public information since November when they were received. If that were the case, why did it take an appeal by Roger Wojcik and his group to the Massachusetts Attorney General under the Freedom of Information Act before these letters were released to the public?  There was virtually no mention of the content of these letters in published meeting minutes.  I believe that the content of these letters state volumes as to the reasons why the letters were withheld from the general public. “That is my personal opinion”.

The new Massachusetts Open Meeting Law that started July 1, 2010 imposes significantly more documentation requirements on town committees and boards including civil penalties and fines up to $1000 for each intentional violation. Perhaps, if this law had been in effect last November, these MSBA/SBC letters would have been required to be public record and easily accessible at the Town Clerk's office in the Longmeadow Town Hall.

A final point… with the Select Board now actively considering action to revamp management of the town website (primarily, in response to my LongmeadowBuzz activity) I believe that two Select Board members (Barkett and Swanson) should abstain from voting on any decision because of the obvious conflict of interest on their part- they are the School Building Committee co-chairs involved with this incident.

We need qualified candidates...

The following are excerpts from the Select Board Candidate Debate held on May 18, 2010 and sponsored by The Longmeadow Youth Sports Council. Production of the video was provided by Phillip Steiger and his efforts are gratefully acknowledged.

The entire Select Board Candidate Debate can be viewed on LCTV's website at http://www.longmeadowtv.org/

Answers for the first debate question are posted below:

What experience do the four candidates running for the two Select Board openings have in financial services and the budget setting arena?









After listening to the candidate answers to this important question, it is pretty clear that one candidate in particular lacks the needed skills and experience to effectively manage a $50 million budget and make difficult and complex decisions facing our town.

While I applaud Mr. Clark's initiative to step up and become involved in town government, our town cannot afford to elect someone to the Select Board at this critical time who is likely to be doing a lot of "on the job training" and resume building.

You're Not Listening!

Jerold… you’re not listening!

In your last posting on the LongmeadowBuzz, you continued to portray Mr. Gold as an uninformed and misguided town official in an attempt to silence his opposition to the School Building project. Contrary to all of the rhetoric, Mark is well versed about town finances and the school building project. His outstanding leadership and commitment during his one year term on the Select Board resulted in a BALANCED budget that was overwhelming approved at last week’s annual town meeting.

It’s interesting to note that two current Select Board members (Mr. Aseltine and chairman, Mr. Barkett) voted AGAINST the approved budget because they wanted to see more cuts in the town side of the budget. Both are strongly in favor of the High School Building project.

I would urge you (as well as Ms. Swanson and other School Building proponents) to spend more time listening and less time bashing Mr. Gold’s position.

Below is a response by Mark Gold to Ms. Swanson’s recent criticism of his position.

Dear Longmeadow Residents,

Much has been written over the past several weeks about Longmeadow High School and it is appropriate for me, as a candidate for reelection to the Select Board, to offer my position. In the six years I served as chair of the Capital Planning Committee and in this past year as a member of the Select Board, I have come to understand and appreciate the serious deficiencies in our high school physical plant. I believe strongly that improvements – major improvements – need to be done to this facility. My work as a Select Board member in leading the development of this year’s operating budget compromise has also shown me the limits of our financial resources and how much Longmeadow will change if we are unable to maintain the diversity and quality of services that so distinctly characterize this town.

I have carefully and thoughtfully reviewed the high school project proposal that is currently before the residents of the town. It is precisely because I care about the schools, education, and the issues that attract and keep residents in Longmeadow that I have concluded that this project, at this time, is not the right project for addressing the deficiencies of Longmeadow High School. At a cost to the taxpayers of $44.4 million, approval of this project will put a financial burden on the town that will unduly limit our ability to address other critical operating and capital needs we face in the coming years.

It would have been a far more politically expedient position for me to support this project as it is proposed. However, it is because I have given this project so much thought and reviewed it in the context of my service as a member of the Select Board and within the broader needs of our town that I have concluded that this is not the right project at this time. The physical plant needs and other issues at the middle schools are of as equal concern to me as the needs of high school. As I look to those and the other overall needs of our educational system I realize that it is a mistake to focus on one issue without recognition of the other needs that are also within our field of vision. All the needs of the school system should be considered so that we understand the resource limits of the town and properly allocate them so that all the needs can be met over the coming years.

There is pressure to support this project based on a sense of urgency; many feel that state aid will be withdrawn unless we move ahead now. Although project supporters may disagree, I look at the upcoming vote as A decision point, rather than THE decision point in this project. Other than “forum” presentations of options under consideration by the school building committee, this vote is the first chance that the residents of town will have to fully weigh in on the scope and cost of the project. The Center School project went through two voter rejections prior to its acceptance, and we ended up with a better school as a result of this process. I have read and understand the policy of the MSBA and have concluded that this is the wrong project at this time. The state will not turn its back on Longmeadow should we decide that our town needs further deliberation before moving ahead.

Having stated my position on the project, and at the risk of reducing the discussion on the Select Board contest to a secondary referendum on the school project, it is important that Ms. Swanson’s erroneous comments on my response to a constituent’s questions be addressed. Although Ms. Swanson apparently received the entire contents of the e-mail I sent to a private individual in response to their questions, her responses to parsed quotations and selected segments appears to continue a policy of leaving no criticism unanswered and no critic unattacked.

So, item by item my responses are as follows:

click here to read the rest of Mr. Gold’s letter.

Longmeadow Select Board Approves FY11 Budget

“At a special board meeting held on March 22, the Longmeadow Select Board approved a town budget of $51,389,100; a reduction of $385,775 from the current year’s spending level. This budget, which reflects a 4% decrease in state aid and the anticipated reduction of other local receipts, will be put before town residents at the Longmeadow Annual Town Meeting on May 11.” [press release, 3/23/10].

The FY11 budget process which has been followed on the Longmeadow Buzz since November when the Tri-Board (School Committee, Select Board and Finance Committee) met has been very difficult. Many budget cuts have been proposed and then restored by both the School Committee and Select Board after careful analysis and feedback from public forums. During this budget process a Select Board initiative toward creating a more sustainable budget was not very successful and next year’s budget will likely meet similar difficulties.

Below are a few short video clips (courtesy of LCTV) from last night’s special SB meeting which provide an overview of various SB member’s positions on the current budget.

The first video clip is Mark Gold explaining his proposal to balance the budget while maintaining as many important town services as possible. His long hours of work to “drill down” into the budget details with Finance Director Paul Pasterczyk, Town Manager Robin Crosbie and others were key to achieving the balanced budget that was approved at last night’s SB meeting.



The second clip is Rob Aseltine “thanking” Mark Gold for diligent work but stating he could not support the budget as proposed because there were insufficient cuts in town side headcount and services and that it did not meet what he felt was the desired sustainability requirement. Without additional town side cuts, the school dept would be severely impacted with their increasing technology and curriculum needs. In this video clip, Mr. Aseltine also suggested that after the June election when the “new board is constituted”, he will launch an important initiative to reduce the town side cost of doing business.



In the next clip Mark Gold provides some additional thoughts on the FY11 budget.



Robin Crosbie- Town Manager shares her thoughts on the issue of “comparable cuts” in budget items. Rob Aseltine had challenged the TM and the SB many times in the past few months suggested that there were insufficient town side headcount reductions as compared to the School Dept. proposal.



This next short clip is Paul Santaniello summarizing his thoughts on the FY11 budget.



The final video clip is that of SB Chair Bobby Barkett commenting on the FY11 budget and expressing some significant reservations that the desired “restructuring” of town government was not achieved and fearing that the state legislature may impart some mid-fiscal year cuts that could be very difficult for our town finances to absorb.



The final vote on the FY11 budget was 3-2 with Gold, Santaniello and Scibelli in favor and Aseltine and Barkett opposed.

An Important Election Season

The following nomination papers have been certified for the Town of Longmeadow Annual Town Election to be held on June 8, 2010.

Select Board – 2 three year seats:
Roy Johansen, 85 Western Drive
Mark Gold, 129 Avondale Road (Incumbent)
Michael Clark, 169 Cooley Drive
Christine Swanson, 96 Salem Road
David Gustafson, 173 Ardsley Road

School Committee – 2 three year seats:
Thomas Brunette, 187 Quinnehtuk Road (Incumbent)
Tracy DeMarco, 152 Meadow Road
Jennifer Jester, 129 Farmington Avenue

Planning Board – 1 five year seat
Kenneth Taylor, 149 Academy Drive (Incumbent)

****At this time the town will need to hold a preliminary election for the two Select Board seats to narrow the field of five candidates down to four on Tuesday, May 4 from 8 am – 8 pm, unless any candidate withdraws their name. The deadline to file objections or withdrawals is March 31 at 5 PM.

Annual Town elections will be held on Tuesday, June 8.

At this election will likely be a vote on a debt exclusion Proposition 2½ override of ~ $46 million for the new high school and the election of two Select Board members who will likely be very influencial regarding the future direction of our town.

It's now the time for town residents to wake up and become informed.

Longmeadow Residents Speak Out

The public forum last Tuesday night (March 9) at Longmeadow HS on the proposed FY11 budget was a chance for town residents to provide some guidance to the Select Board as they make the necessary final FY11 budget cuts. At this meeting town residents provided balanced feedback citing the importance of schools, library, parks and recreation programs, senior center, police/ fire.... not wanting cuts from any of these important town programs.

Below are a couple of video clips (courtesy of LCTV) of comments made by town residents expressing their concern for cuts in various programs. [A web rebroadcast of the entire public forum is posted on LCTV's website.]

The first video shows town resident Jamie Cass- a Springfield teacher commenting on the town’s outstanding Parks and Recreation program and the Storrs Library and asks that the Select Board not cut funds to either program.


The second video is town resident Irene Madden- a career school librarian and Storrs Library board member overviewing all of the many programs provided by the Children’s Library staff.


The third video clip shows town resident Saul Finestone appealing to the Select Board not to cut the Longmeadow Adult Center budget because of all the important programs that it provides for senior citizens in our town.

_________________________________________________________

I think that it's important to understand that there have been many more cuts proposed than will likely be needed to create a balanced FY11 budget. The ongoing budget discussions involve identifying potential budget cuts and then prioritizing them.

The latest information yesterday from the state legislature recommended that towns prepare for a 4% maximum cut in local aid. This should provide some relief for the FY11 budget and allow the Select Board to restore some of the proposed budget cuts.

The Select Board has another goal and that is to create a "sustainable budget" so the current fiscal problems do not reappear year after year. "Our expenditures are too high and the rate of increase too great to be sustainable and must be reduced." This message is repeated at virtually every SB meeting since November. It will be very interesting to see how budget process ends up... it is the not the first time that our town leaders have tried to tackle the imbalance of expenditures vs. revenue growth.

It is not too late to provide your inputs to the Select Board regarding proposed program cuts in the FY11 budget. The Select Board will meet again on March 15 to discuss the budget and there is a public comment period at the beginning of the meeting.

On March 22 the SB will approve the final FY11 budget (town + schools) to be presented at the Annual Town Meeting on May 11.

A difficult budget process continues…

Recent Select Board meetings have been been primarily focused upon making some difficult decisions about needed town government cuts for the upcoming FY2011 budget. The uncertainty about state aid to Longmeadow (estimates vary from 0 to 15% cut) has only made the process more difficult.

Proposed budget cuts for Storrs Library, Longmeadow Adult Center and other town departments will likely impact town services and quality of life in Longmeadow. I listened to the SB meeting this past Monday (~ 3½ hours) and observed that there was great disagreement within the SB as to how to achieve the required cuts.

In addition to proposing some additional cuts, Town Manager, Robin Crosbie also identified a number of new revenue sources to help bridge the gap that included:

• Fee based curbside trash collection ( save ~$570,000)
• Implementation of the new 0.75% meal tax on local restaurants (estimated increase in revenue ~$65,000)
• Reinstitute School Choice (this source can be initiated only by the School Committee)
• Proposition 2½ Override
  Every 1% override would add $382,000 to town revenue and cost individual property owners $0.18/ $1000 or ~$64 for average $350,000 house. The SB was not recommending an override at this time but considering it as a possible option to bridge the expenditure/ revenue gap.

I applaud the SB for their open and honest discussion of the FY11 budget and their desire to reshape the entire town’s operations (including the school department) onto to a more sustainable path. One of my recent posts included an LCTV video clip of Rob Aseltine explaining the financial problem confronting Longmeadow both short term and long term.

At this point it appears that the Town Manager with the help of the various department heads has selected and prioritized a larger than required list of cuts that could be made to achieve the targeted budget. One note of interest is that the FY11 budget appears to be a “moving target” given the uncertainty of state aid. At this week’s SB meeting, it was agreed to use a 10% (vs. 15%) cut in state aid in developing the FY11 budget. It is likely that the exact amount of state aid to Longmeadow will not be known until well after the FY11 begins.

The selected video clip from this week’s SB meeting is Rob Aseltine expressing his dissatisfaction with the level of personnel cuts included in the latest budget revision (referred to as the March 1 budget).



There are some important meetings this coming week….

Monday, March 8
Joint meeting between School Committee and Select Board to discuss FY11 Budget
7 PM at Longmeadow School Committee Room

Tuesday, March 9
Budget Public Forum- draft FY11 budget- presented by Town Manager, Robin Crosbie7 PM at Longmeadow High School/ Cafeteria

I would urge town residents to attend the March 9 forum and provide input to our town leaders for prioritization of the needed budget cuts.

Longmeadow's FY11 Budget

This week’s Select Board discussion on the FY11 budget provided some good insight into the current “state of town finances”. However, what I observed was not very encouraging. The uncertainty about the level of local state aid makes this current budget development process very difficult. The current budget proposal assumes a 15% drop in state aid. There was some discussion at this meeting as to whether or not this number should be reduced since the rhetoric from Boston in this election year suggests that the state will deliver.

Below are two short video excerpts (less than 10 min. each) from this meeting that are worth watching. The first is an overview of the town government portion of the FY11 draft budget discussed by Town Manager Robin Crosbie. It should be noted that a final budget will not be adopted by the Select Board until March 22.

Ms. Crosbie highlighted that town expenditures were being reduced through various means including a reduction of normal maintenance work (essential repairs only), a cut in library hours (50 hours to 45 hours), less maintenance of athletic fields (+ reduced fertilizer, water, etc…). In addition, there are headcount reductions at the library and DPW. Ms. Crosbie did mention that she was hoping that Carl Sturgis, Library Director would be able to restore library hours to 50 hours by shifting some other sections of the budget.



The second clip includes comments by Select Board members Rob Aseltine and Mark Gold highlighting that the town budget at the level of current services is unsustainable due to the faster growth of expenditures relative to revenue. In addition, the level of expenditures for the current budget is too high. The choices are either continuing cuts in services that will erode our quality of life in many ways or accepting the need for periodic overrides to keep pace with the escalating costs and lower revenue growth.



There is a budget forum that will be held on March 9 at 7 PM in the Longmeadow HS cafeteria. I urge all town residents to attend or watch it on LCTV. The FY11 budget is an important issue affecting all Longmeadow residents.

[The above video clips were provided courtesy of LongmeadowBiz + LCTV. A web broadcast of entire Select Board/ School Committee meetings can watched by visiting the LCTV website.]

Special Town Meeting/ Election for Longmeadow School Building Project

The Longmeadow Select Board (SB) meeting this past Monday (2/01/10) turned into a marathon 4+ hour session with the first hour dedicated to visitor comments (vs. normal five minutes). The primary subject for these comments was the proposal by the School Building Committee (SBC) to have a separate Town Meeting and Town Election for the School Building Project. The proposed timing for both was before the Annual Town Meeting scheduled for May 11. This school building project is currently in final design phase before being submitted for approval by the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) in March 2010. The estimated project cost is ~$81 million which will require a Proposition 2½ override vote (2/3 majority) at a Town Meeting and at a townwide election (majority YES vote). Estimated taxpayer annual property tax increase is $1/1000 or $300 for a $300,000 home payable every year for 25 years.

Below is a 10 minute video (courtesy of LCTV) with selected excerpts from this “public comments” agenda item…



The primary argument used by most people speaking in favor of a separate special town meeting was that people needed ample time to ask their questions so that they could decide which way to vote. As I conduct my own unscientific poll around town, I do find many residents who do not have a good understanding as to what is happening. The SBC has made a good attempt so far to help educate town residents about this project through numerous public forums but there appears to be a lot more that needs to be accomplished….

I strongly agree with town resident Arlene Miller (see video excerpt) who stated that waiting for the town meeting (annual or special) is too late to learn about the project in order to make an informed decision. Longmeadow voters need to do their homework on this project before the town meeting and only look for clarification on key points.

Voters also need to be able to factor in the operational side of our town finances. With a potential major cut in town/school services and/or operational Propositional 2½ override for FY11, town residents need to have this information at the same time as this school building project decision is made.

After considerable discussion, the SB decided by a vote of 4:1 in favor (Rob Aseltine against) to schedule a special town meeting on May 25 (after the Annual Town Meeting on May 11) and not to grant the request of a special election.

I strongly agree with this SB decision and feel that any attempt to circumvent it through a SBC initiated voter petition or other means should be met with public skepticism as to its motive.

A Budget Update for Longmeadow

As reported in a previous post a collective bargaining agreement has been signed between the Longmeadow School Committee and the Longmeadow Education Association. While this agreement does not reduce the $2.15 million projected deficit for the FY11 budget, it does provide town leaders some clarity about unresolved potential future salary obligations for the town. The estimated salary budget cost avoidance of this contract vs. a 1% COLA for FY10 and FY11 is estimated to be ~$675,000 assuming that teachers salaries are ~ 75% of the town employees. Let’s hope that the remaining town and school collective bargaining units are considering similar contract agreements as the Longmeadow Education Association.

click here to read full story

There was some additional news this past week regarding the state aid… Governor Patrick announced that his proposed FY11 budget would include level funding for education and unrestricted local aid for cities and towns.

The $2.1 million projected deficit for FY11 discussed at earlier budget meetings (Tri-Board + Select Board) anticipated a 15% cut in local aid for Longmeadow. FY10 state aid for Longmeadow is expected to be $5.6 million (Chapter 70 = $4.34M + unrestricted local aid = $1.23M) … so a 15% shortfall = $837K. If the FY11 budget proposal for level funding for cities and towns passes the legislature, it would shrink the projected FY11 deficit for Longmeadow to $1.31 million.

However, given that this is an election year (and Gov. Patrick is running for re-election with state Treasurer Timothy Cahill as one of his opponents), there is hardly unanimous support for this level funding of local aid to cities and towns given the current economic environment.

click here to read full story

In the past week, Mass State House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Murphy- the chief budget writer from Burlington, MA was quoted as saying: “I heard what the Governor said to you yesterday about level funding local aid. Well, good luck to him!”

It looks like it will sometime this summer before Longmeadow will have solid information about how much local aid it will actually receive for FY11! Not much different than last year.

Bottom line

Given the difficult fiscal situation still facing the state of Massachusetts, Longmeadow should continue to plan how it would deal with a significant drop (10-15%) in state aid. Perhaps, the idea of multiple budget scenarios and related cuts should be used as suggested in earlier Tri-Board budget discussions.

Both the School Committee and Select Board will continue intense budget discussions next week and it will be interesting to see what actions each group plans take to meet their assigned targeted cuts (Schools = $1.5 million cut, Town = $650,000 = $2.15 million).

Upcoming dates for the FY 11 Budget Process….

1. Select Board/ Regular Meeting, February 1 at 7 PM- Police Dept Community Meeting Room


2. School Committee- Special Meeting- February 4 at 7 PM in the School Committee Room at Longmeadow HS to discuss the School Department FY 2011 Budget.


3. School Committee- Public Hearing- February 8 at 7 PM in the LHS Cafeteria- on the Longmeadow School Committee budget.


4. School Committee/ Select Board- Special Meeting- February 24 at 7 PM in the School Committee Room FY2011 Budget Presentation


5. February 26- FY2011 budget submission by Town Manager to Select Board

Check the Town Calendar at LongmeadowBiz for the latest calendar of scheduled events.

Tough Times Ahead for Longmeadow- Part IV

I have now been writing about Longmeadow’s budget problems for about one year (see A Financial Tsunami Is Heading Toward Us (1/16/09). The situation really hasn’t changed since the last time I wrote on this subject… see Tough Times Ahead for Longmeadow- Part III (12/06/10).

Previous posts include:
Tough Times Ahead…Part I
Tough Times Ahead….. Part II

Here is an overview of the current fiscal crisis facing Longmeadow…

• The town is facing a $2.1 million budget deficit for the upcoming FY11 without considering the financial impact of ongoing collective bargaining with the teachers, firefighters, police and other town employee unions.


• A 1% COLA adjustment for the current FY10 and FY11 years would add an additional $900,000 in additional operational costs (FY10 = $300,000 and FY11 = $600,000). Such a contract settlement would balloon the FY11 deficit to $3 million.


• There is $0 in our free cash account.


• There is $1.9 million in the Operational Stabilization Fund (OSF).The SB has recently adopted a policy that stated they will not authorize the use of OSF monies which depletes the fund below $1.0 million unless there is a plan to replenish the fund to that level.

A large majority of the town + school budget costs are employee salaries + benefits so a reduction of $2,100,000 in expenditures likely means significant layoffs and/ or furloughs. Paul Pasterczyk, Longmeadow’s Finance Director stated at a recent SB meeting (12/07/09) that any employee layoffs would also require the town to pay unemployment compensation/ severance benefits that could total as much as $450-600,000.

Achieving a budget reduction of $2,100,000 (~4% of total budget) will not be very easy without seriously affecting the quality of life in Longmeadow. One of the options being seriously considered by some SB members though not voiced during public meetings is the closing of Storrs Library. Closing of the Storrs Library would save an estimated $675,000 but it would be a severe impact to our community given the large number of people who use this important resource on a regular basis.


Other options that may be considered by the SB to reduce costs include:
- regionalization of town services including library, DPW, fire, water
- continued consolidation of town departments
- institution of a fee based curbside trash collection

The Town of Longmeadow is also engaged with the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) on a path to the building of a new high school at an estimated price tag of ~ $80.5 million. Approval by the MSBA will likely come sometime in late March after which the town has 120 days to approve the project. Longmeadow’s share after reimbursement by the state has been estimated to be ~ $44 million. The high school project must be approved at a town meeting and town election (Proposition 2½ debt exclusion override). If the Prop. 2½ debt exclusion override is approved, cost to the average property owner has been estimated to be $1/$1000 of assessed property value or $300/year for a $300,000 home. This is an extremely important project to the town but it would appear to be in serious jeopardy given the current budget crisis and national/ local economies (see my earlier LongmeadowBuzz post- Now Is the Right Time!)

The Town Manager is scheduled to present the proposed FY11 budget (including the School Dept) to the SB on February 26. It will be very interesting to see how the TM manages to balance the budget. From recent SB discussions, it would appear that town employee COLAs will not be included and any potential financial impact will be ignored. At their December 7 meeting the SB asked the School Committee to deliver 70% of the required cuts (~$1.5 million) in their proposed FY11 budget and the Town Depts to provide 30% of the required cuts (or $630,000). They also asked for priorization of the proposed cuts.

Here is what I see taking place later this year….

1. Presentation of a balanced budget (without contract settlements?) at the Annual Town Meeting (ATM) on May 11 with budget cuts significantly affecting both school and town services. It is possible that there also may be a vote on a Proposition 2½ operational budget override to balance the budget.
   
2. At the ATM there will be a warrant article for a Proposition 2½ debt exclusion override for $44 million to build a new high school.
   
3. Town elections will be held on June 8 to decide the two separate Proposition 2½ override questions. It should be noted that the last Proposition 2½ (operational) override for $2.1 million in November 2007 passed by only 6 votes. The outcome of these votes will influence the quality of life and services in our town for many years.

One thing that concerns me greatly is the lack of interest and/or understanding by many town residents about this current crisis. As I survey residents around town and ask them what they think, many of them are not very familiar with the school building process or the severity of the need to reduce the town budget. It will be too late if town residents wait until the annual town meeting to provide their inputs to town leaders…. the decisions will already have been made.

Now is the time to become involved and provide inputs to our town leaders about how to manage the budget!

[If someone is interested in contributing an article to the LongmeadowBuzz forum, simply send a request to LongmeadowBuzz@comcast.net with your name and address and you will receive an invitation to join. Anyone can post a comment to a posting but we would like to disencourage anonymous entries. All comments on this forum are moderated to eliminate objectionable content.]

Tough Times Ahead for Longmeadow- Part III

I attended the Tri-Board meeting last Monday night (11/30/09) and came away disappointed with the discussion that took place between our town leaders. It certainly wasn’t the meeting that I was expecting and left me feeling that this year’s approach to resolving difficult budget issues may not be much different from previous years.

I believe that there are some major planning and budgeting hurdles to overcome this year.

On the horizon there is a decision that will likely be made by town voters next June regarding the funding of new high school (Proposition 2½ “debt exclusion” override) and the possibility of a large budget operating deficit that will result in a significant reduction of town/ school services and/or the need for an Proposition 2½ “operational” override. At this latest Tri-Board meeting there was no clear budget strategy outlined as to how the town will successfully navigate these difficult times.

Given that our last Proposition 2½ override in Fall 2007 passed by only 5 votes with a 40% voter turnout… I believe in today’s financial world that the probability of passing two Proposition 2½ overrides by Longmeadow voters in a single year is very low.

There was much dialog about the gloomy state of town finances for the upcoming FY11 and FY12 budgets. Paul Pasterczyk, Longmeadow's Finance Director presented an overview of these budgets with projected deficits ~ $2.1 million in both FY11 and FY12.

These budget projections by Mr. Pasterczyk were made based upon the following assumptions:

• Level funding (not level services) for both schools and town departments.
• A 15% cut in state aid for FY11 vs. FY10
• COLAs for teachers, fire and police were not included since collective bargaining is still ongoing.
  Note: A negotiated 1% COLA for each of the contract years (FY09, FY10 and FY11) will add an additional $900K of annual spending to the FY11 and FY12 budgets.
• Step increases were included for teachers at $450K in FY11 and $900K in FY12.
• There was no change in capital funding of projects for FY11 and FY12 vs. FY10 ($681K) which is significantly lower than FY09.

As of November 30, the Operational Stabilization Fund (OSF) has $1.9 million (vs. $2.15 million as last reported in mid October). There is currently $0 in the Free Cash Fund.

The Select Board will spend time discussing the upcoming budget process at their meeting tomorrow night (December 7). The official FY11 budget planning process begins next with instructions from the Town Manager going to Town departments on December 15.

Let’s hope that town leaders start showing the necessary leadership to get us through these difficult times.

Tough Times Ahead for Longmeadow- Part II

Monday, November 30 is the next Longmeadow Tri-Board (Select Board, School Committee and Finance Committee) meeting during which serious dialog about the FY11 budget process will begin. Select Board chair Bobby Barkett stated at a recent SB meeting that this next Tri-Board meeting was likely to be “very contentious” because of the difficult financial issues facing the town and the likely need to make significant cuts in both town and school services in order to balance the FY11 budget. The difficulties in setting priorities for cutting town and school services presents some major challenges for our elected leaders.

In my previous post summarizing the Tri-Board’s first meeting on October 19, I highlighted some of the major financial issues facing the town of Longmeadow including the following….

• There are continuing significant reductions in state aid for the current FY10.


• The Longmeadow Teachers, Firefighters, Police and other town employee unions have not as yet settled contract negotiations for FY10 and beyond. Each 1% annual increase in COLA would be an additional $300,000 in annual budget costs. The current FY10 budget does not include any COLA provisions.
  
  
• Longmeadow faces a projected $2.1 million budget deficit in FY11 without consideration of the financial impact of current union contract negotiations.

As labor contract negotiations continue without agreement, significant budget uncertainties are created which makes the upcoming budget process even that much more difficult. Let me explain further….

• Assume that both unions agree to a 1% COLA adjustment for the current year and for each of the next two years.


• This COLA would add an additional $900,000 in additional operational costs to the FY10 (+$300,000) and FY11 (+$600,000) budgets.


• The total budget deficit (FY10 [adjusted] + FY11) that must be dealt with by the Tri-Board would balloon to $3,000,000.

The Town currently has very little free cash (appropriated most of it at the October 27 Special Town Meeting); there are monies in special purpose reserves funds (water/ sewer, CPA, etc.) and $2.2 million in the Operational Stabilization Fund (OSF) which is considered the “rainy day” account for funding special circumstances and events. According to Mark Barowsky- Finance Committee chairman, a portion of the money from the last successful Proposition 2½ override ($2.15 million- Fall 2007) was placed in this OSF account for use to maintain services for FY08 --> FY10 and beyond so it might be considered for possible use to help balance the FY11 budget.

Recent efforts led by Town Manager Robin Crosbie and Select Board member Mark Gold to identify new revenue sources ($>10K) which might help balance the FY11 and beyond budgets have not been highly successful and do not seem likely to significantly improve the FY11 revenue situation.

To make the financial crisis facing the Town even more difficult.... it is likely that taxpayers will be asked to vote at the Annual Town Meeting next April (and Town Elections in June) in favor of a Proposition 2½ “debt exclusion” override to fund the new High School project. The Massachusetts School Building Authority has recently approved Longmeadow’s new High School project –estimated at ~ $80+ million- and allowed it to move forward to the Schematic Design phase. It has been estimated by the Longmeadow School Building Committee that approval and passage of this project by town voters will add ~ $1 to the current mil rate which translates to ~ $300/year for a house assessed at $300,000 (~6% increase in annual taxes).

The Town can certainly decide to allocate a portion of the monies in the OSF to help balance the upcoming FY11 budget but not without other implications. If the Town uses a significant portion of the OSF to avoid major services reductions for the upcoming FY11, then there could be a large impact on our bond rating (lower rating --> increased interest costs) when we go forward with the new high school project unless the Town shows how it plans to meet growing budget shortfall in future years (FY2012 --> FY2015).

If one looks at Longmeadow’s annual budget for both school and town related services, you will see that the major component is employee salaries. Any significant reduction in budget spending via reduced town/ school services means employee layoffs. A previous post on LongmeadowBuzz blog asked teachers and other unions to consider a 0% COLA for FY10 as a good faith effort to help avoid/ minimize town employee layoffs.

I would not like to see headlines in the local newspapers….

followed by:

Given today’s financial reality for many town residents, it will be difficult for Longmeadow voters pass two large Proposition 2½ overrides come next spring. The last successful override in the Fall 2007 passed by only a small majority (6 votes with a 41% voter turnout). We need a new high school but we also need to maintain the quality of life and town related services that make Longmeadow a great place to live.

Let’s hope that both our town leaders can successfully navigate these turbulent financial waters.

Is the “24 hour shift” safety issue a “red herring”?

The first indications that contract negotiations between the Town of Longmeadow and the Firefighters Union were not going very well occurred at the Select Board Meeting on September 22. During the comments period at the beginning of the meeting, Robert Taylor, president of the local Firefighters Union read a strongly worded message charging the Town Manager and the Select Board of not acting in good faith during the ongoing collective bargaining process.

Then, there was the Public Forum on October 7 at Glenbrook Middle School regarding a proposed Special Town Meeting Warrant Article. At this forum the Select Board was seeking public input on the question of public employees working scheduled shifts of greater than 14 hours per day. I attended this public forum and found the discussion to be quite concerning and contentious. The Town Manager and Select Board argued that there were safety concerns for both town residents and firefighters with the move to a longer shift schedule. Firefighter representatives and other speakers argued that the move to a 24 hour shift schedule was being successfully used by 75% of the fire departments in Massachusetts and actually resulted in less sleep deprivation and safety issues as compared to the current shorter duration 10/14 hour shift schedules. Threats of additional lawsuits and additional town charter changes for self interest were made.

A statement made by one of the firefighters’ representatives at the forum confused me.

...The Select Board has already proposed a 24 hour work shift but with a longer work week. How can the Select Board now use the safety issue to argue against 24 hour shifts?

I walked away from the town forum with considerably less conviction about my previous support for the Select Board position. From the tone of the discussion it also sounded like this disagreement was going to be settled in the courts at the expense of us taxpayers. The most surprising thing was that this controversy involved a small group of 21 firefighters whose union in the past has almost been invisible to town residents.

In an effort to better understand this controversy, I spent some time last Saturday night at the Longmeadow Fire Station talking with John Dearborn- a long time firefighter about fire/ medical emergency coverage and long shifts. John convinced me that 2- 24 hour shifts can actually result in less sleep related problems than the current 2-10 hr + 2-14 hour shifts and that the system has built-in mechanisms to monitor fatigue and to adapt to long hours.

Below is a schematic outline of the current schedule….

[click to enlarge chart]

You can see from the above chart that on day 6 of a typical 8 day schedule, a firefighter will get only 10 hours time off between 2- 14 hour night shifts and that time off comes during the day which may make it difficult to get needed rest. John explained to me that going to a 24 hour shift schedule was simply running the 10 hr + 14 hr shifts back-to-back into a 24 hour shift.

A firefighter’s schedule seems a lot more complicated than what I was exposed to during my work career. Occasionally, I did work 24 hour shifts on plant coverage and in most cases it was without “house rest”. My work experience was in large part why I originally supported the Town Manager/ Select Board to change the Town Charter and block the move to 24 hour shift schedules because of safety related concerns.

John Dearborn also shared with me that all affected department members are in favor of the change to a 24 hour schedule.

Here is the red herring question…
Are there additional reasons other than safety for the Town Manager/ Select Board to block by extraordinary means (by changing the Town Charter) the move to a 24 hour shift schedule by the Longmeadow Fire Department?

Unless the Town Manager/ Select Board can provide stronger evidence for the safety related issues regarding longer work hours or identify other reasons, I would urge town voters to attend the upcoming Special Town Meeting on October 27 and vote NO on Article 13.

In addition, I would encourage both the Town Manager/ Select Board and Firefighters Union to return to the collective bargaining process where this type of issue should be resolved and not allow it to move to the courtroom wherein our taxpayer money would be spent in a less than desirable manner.