🪙 Town Meeting 5-5-25 (Budget & Pickleball) AI Recap

Below is a summarized version of Town Meeting (Articles 11 and 14), organized by timestamps and speakers, focusing on key points raised during the discussion in Reading, Massachusetts. The meeting included both the budget discussion and pickleball courts. This summary condenses the discussion into major themes, speaker contributions, and decisions, avoiding excessive detail while retaining the essence of the conversation. Timestamps correspond to the video linked at the bottom.

Opening and Procedural Setup

7:24 – 9:25: Moderator Alan Folds and Ms. Sharon Angstrom

• Overview: The meeting began with a budget explanation, emphasizing the traditional approach of addressing the budget first to complete it in one session. The budget is divided into groups (B: Benefits, C: Capital, etc.), with each group discussed and amended separately.
• Process: After a general budget presentation by Ms. Angstrom, Mr. Kraunelis, and Dr. Milaschewski (for schools), each line-item group is voted on for amendments. A final vote on the entire budget occurs after reconciling any changes.
• Motion: Ms. Melissa Murphy moved to take Article 11 (budget) from the table, seconded, and carried (9:19).

---

Budget Discussion

(Article 11)

9:34 – 15:47: Ms. Angstrom (Financial Update)

• Financial Status:
  • Fiscal 2025 started with $19.3M in certified free cash. After approvals ($6.5M in November, $688K on Monday, and $6M proposed for fiscal 2026), ~$12M remains.
  • Reserves: $2M in stabilization funds, $200K in Fincom reserves, totaling $14.2M (11.5% of net available revenues, exceeding the 7% policy minimum).
• Trends:
  • Free cash regeneration typically exceeds usage, but recent inflation has increased reliance on free cash to maintain services.
  • Debt exclusions: Only three historical exclusions (high school, WoodEnd, library), all to be paid off before new exclusions. No near-term excluded debt projects planned.
  • Prop 2½ overrides: Historical overrides in 1993 ($2.41M), 2003 ($4.5M), and 2018 ($4.15M). The 2018 override is in its eighth year, suggesting a potential override in the next few years (~$5-6M, costing households ~$500-600/year).
• Revenues (Fiscal 2026):
  • Property taxes: Up 2% (appears low due to excluded debt falling off; typically 3-3.2%).
  • Local revenues: Up 5.2%.
  • State aid: Up 2.5% (based on Fincom guidance).
  • Transfers: Up 2.2% (enterprise fund indirect costs, RMLD earnings).
  • Reserves: Up 68.5% due to rising accommodation costs and Prop 2½ restrictions.
  • Total revenue increase: 3.7%.
• Expenses:
  • Shared costs: Up 3.8% (misleading due to excluded debt falling off; without it, up 6.9%).
  • Town government: Up 2.8%.
  • Schools: Up 3.9%.
  • General fund: Up 3.5%.
  • Water: Up 11.7% (due to $200K for irrigation meters).
  • Sewer: Down 0.3% (debt reduction).
  • Stormwater: Down 43.2% ($450K capital reduction).
  • PEG access: Down 3.7% (declining cable subscribers).
  • Landfill: Unchanged (pass-through for monitoring).
• Key Budget Details:
  • Benefits: Up 10.9% (pension +8%, health insurance +13.6%).
  • Capital: Down 10.3% ($3.398M proposed, including fire truck, road repairs, sander truck, etc.).
  • Debt: Down 25.6% (no excluded debt for 2026).
  • Vocational schools: Up 18.6% (due to enrollment and a school’s capital charge increase).
  • Reserves: $200K (unchanged).

15:47 – 22:05: Ms. Angstrom and Mr. Kraunelis (Shared Costs and Town Budget)

• Shared Costs:
  • Detailed by category, with benefits and vocational school costs driving increases.
• Town Government Budget (Mr. Kraunelis):
  • Up 2.8%, with 251.5 FTEs (slight increase).
  • Departments:
    • Administrative Services: Up 0.7% (fewer elections reduce costs).
    • Technology: Up 8.1% (security software licensing).
    • Public Services: Up 3.5% (recreation, senior center positions covered).
    • Public Safety: Up 3.4% (health +8% wages, fire/EMS +8.4% expenses, police +14.9% expenses for software/parking enforcement).
    • Finance: Up 3% (new treasury analyst, reduced assessor costs).
    • Public Works: Up 0.9% (flat wages, reduced invasive plant management).
    • Library: Up 3.6% (new equity office expense).
    • Facilities: Up 3.3% (energy cost increases moderated).

22:05 – 54:24: Dr. Milaschewski (School Budget and State of Schools)

• State of Schools:
  • Highlighted achievements: Schools above 90th percentile (Barrows, Joshua Eaton), Parker Middle School recognized for growth.
  • Literacy: Elementary students neared 90th percentile (up from low 70s in 2018), with third graders in top 5% statewide.
  • Math: Grades 3-8 at 88th percentile, third graders at 98th.
  • High School: Innovation pathways (computer science, engineering, etc.), dual enrollment, and career-focused programs praised by state officials.
  • Special Education: LEAD program in 95th percentile; METCO enrollment expanded.
  • Extracurriculars: State champions in cross country, field hockey, band; academic excellence (National Merit Scholars, Seal of Biliteracy).
  • Food Services: Increased meals served (250K to 400K), with local vendor partnerships and student praise.
  • Post-Secondary Paths: Students pursuing military, HBCUs, gap years, and selective colleges.
• Budget Strategies:
  • Increase Revenues: School choice ($300K in FY25, ~$400K in FY26), tuition for special programs ($12K-$46K per student).
  • Decrease Expenditures: Invest in high-quality curriculum, counselors, and early literacy screening to reduce intervention needs; enhance in-district special education to avoid out-of-district placements.
  • Leverage Funds: Special ed reserve fund (~$400K, aiming for $700K), innovation grants ($500K over three years), METCO grant expansion.

2:20:00 – 2:24:05: Discussion on PEG Access (RCTV Funding)

• Mr. Grant (2:20:00): Expressed concern about RCTV’s shrinking funding due to declining cable subscribers, asked about other funding sources.
• Ms. Angstrom: Confirmed RCTV is a nonprofit relying on fundraising and PEG access grants, with no additional town funding.
• Ms. Snow Dockser (2:20:52): Praised RCTV’s community service (accessibility, student training), urged town to consider increased support, acknowledged no budget increase possible under current funding.
• Moderator (2:23:37): Noted RCTV grant agreement renewal at fiscal year-end could address coverage and support.

2:24:14 – 2:24:41: Landfill Enterprise Fund and Budget Vote

• Landfill Enterprise Fund: No discussion.
• Budget Vote (2:24:14): Motion to approve FY 2026 budget ($146,427,220, excluding state/county assessments) passed by simple majority.

---

Pickleball Courts Discussion

(Article 14)

• Proposal (2:27:05, Ms. Wellman): $1.5M for 6-7 pickleball courts at Simon’s Way, funded by $1M borrowing, $225K from Reading Pickleball Players Association (RPPA), $200K from Burbank Arena Fund, $100K from recreation capital. Site chosen to mitigate noise, includes post-tension concrete, lighting (bid alternate), and stormwater retention.
• Background:
  • Pickleball in Reading since 2012, with high demand (94% court utilization, 14,650 reservations in 2024).
  • Current courts (4 at Memorial Park, 4 subpar at RMHS) insufficient; Birch Meadow plan for 8 courts dropped due to noise concerns.
  • Simon’s Way site ideal (distant from residences, uses existing parking).
• Fincom Recommendation (2:33:39, Ms. Sisson): Voted 9-0 on March 19 to recommend Article 14 after spirited debate.

3:12:07 – 4:08:19: Various Speakers

• Proposal: $1.5M borrowing for pickleball courts at Symond’s Way, with $200K from Burbank fund and $100K from recreation capital; Reading Pickleball Association (RPPA) contributed $225K, reducing borrowing to $1.275M.
• Key Points:
  • Support:
    • Carl Nazzaro (3:21:48): Highlighted RPPA’s persistence despite being “pingponged” around town, emphasized community benefits for all ages, especially seniors, and noted underutilized tennis courts compared to pickleball demand.
    • Carlo Bacci (3:26:07): Avid player and coach, praised the social and mental health benefits, supported scaling down from eight to six courts, and urged approval as a community asset.
    • Dan Malone (3:38:39): Pickleball enthusiast, supported the plan but raised concerns about town spending, suggested usage fees.
    • Emily James (3:42:50): Emphasized family and intergenerational benefits, shared personal story of her 75-year-old father playing with grandkids.
    • Tom Wise (3:44:36): Advocated for approval, citing high demand and joy across ages, proposed an amendment for a payment scheme to offset costs.
    • Jennifer Hillary (3:50:00): Supported the amendment if it ensures equitable access, noting pickleball’s low-cost entry.
  • Opposition/Concerns:
    • Unnamed Speaker (3:12:07): Suggested a minimal plan (two courts) with a cost cap, questioned concrete’s five-year guarantee vs. asphalt, and preferred costs under $1M.
    • John Sullivan (3:14:22): Questioned parking overlap with the recal project, confirmed shared parking would reduce costs.
    • Brendan Gray (3:16:36): Questioned the number of players (378 unique residents reserved courts), raised injury concerns, suggested fees ($15 resident, $25 non-resident) or private development to avoid taxpayer burden.
    • Amy Sane (3:40:44): Acknowledged RPPA’s advocacy but cited public opposition, upcoming override costs, and lack of a clear monetization plan as reasons to vote no.
    • Vanessa Alvarado (4:02:45): Questioned the land’s use if Recal fails, Burbank fund allocation ($200K), and why it wasn’t used for other projects; struggled to justify the expense.
  • Amendments:
    • Steven Cool (3:29:57): Proposed making funding contingent on RPPA forming a corporation to lease the property, relieving town maintenance. Outcome: Defeated (3:38:24) after concerns from Ethan Dively (town counsel) about legality and Eileen Manning opposing it as inappropriate for volunteers.
    • Tom Wise (3:45:47): Proposed adding a court scheduling payment system for residents and non-residents to generate offsetting revenue, with friendly amendments to ensure accessibility and sustainability. Outcome: Revoked (4:00:01) due to legal concerns from Ethan Dively about attaching it to a borrowing article.
  • Monetization:
    • Ms. Wellman (recreation director) noted existing fees for non-residents ($25/court) and recreation’s self-funding model (~$900K annually). Other towns’ fee structures (e.g., Lexington $170/adult, Andover $75/resident) were cited as feasible.
    • Funds would go to a recreation revolving fund for general maintenance, not directly to debt service, ensuring sustainability.
  • Legal Concerns:
    • Ethan Dively (3:56:44, 3:57:41) raised issues about attaching revenue schemes to a borrowing article without bond counsel review, suggesting a separate future motion.

4:00:14 – 4:08:02: Motion to Table

• Phil Pacino (4:00:14): Moved to table the article until Thursday to allow staff review.
• Counter Motion: Robert Coulter moved to end debate, but the vote (72-63) failed to reach the 2/3 threshold (4:02:33).
• Doug Bruce (4:07:36): Renewed motion to table until Thursday, seconded, and carried by majority vote (4:08:02).

---

Key Outcomes

1. Budget (Article 11):
   • Approved at $146,427,220 (excluding state/county assessments) by simple majority (2:24:41).
   • Comprehensive financial overview presented, highlighting revenue/expense trends, school achievements, and reserve strategies.
2. Pickleball Courts (Article 14):
   • Debate centered on cost ($1.5M, reduced to $1.275M with RPPA contribution), community benefits, and monetization.
   • Amendments to address funding (leasing to RPPA, payment schemes) were proposed but either defeated or revoked due to legal concerns.
   • Article tabled until Thursday, May 8, 2025, for further staff review.
3. Meeting Adjournment:
   • Adjourned until Thursday, May 8, 2025, at 7:30 PM at the fieldhouse (4:08:14).