Advisory Committee's Recommendations for Foxborough's 2013 Annual Town Meeting

In advance of the May 13th annual Town Meeting at Foxborough High School, the town’s Advisory Committee will have taken positions on each of the warrant’s 29 articles.

Of the 29 articles expected to be presented on Town Meeting floor, AdCom has  recommended approval on 19, including Article 28, which is the Invensys TIF agreement. The committee's position on six articles will be made available at Town Meeting, according to AdCom chair Larry Thomas. The committee recommends disapproval for just one article prior to Town Meeting: Article 18, Stretch Energy Code By-Law.

Below is a summary of AdCom’s recommendations for the 2013 annual Town Meeting, which will begin at 7:30 p.m. in the auditorium of Foxborough High School on Monday, May 13th.

To view the Annual Town Meeting warrant, click here.

Approval (6-2 vote)

The Advisory Committee recommends approval of the Capital Improvement Planning Budget, which was developed by the CIP Committee and approved by the Board of Selectmen. The CIP Committee is responsible for reviewing spending for major non-recurring tangible assets and for vehicles and equipment, which have a useful life of at least 5 years and cost over $25,000. The total cost for FY14 CIP is $3,647,576. Please refer to Appendix A in the Warrant for individual department expenditures, description of asset, cost and funding sources.

The purpose of this article is to see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate a sum of money to supplement the wage and salary amounts voted under Article 4 of the Warrant in accordance with the terms and conditions of a document entitled “Revised Consolidated Personnel By-Law 2014,” and to determine whether to meet said appropriation by taxation or by transfer from available funds; or take any other action related thereto.

As in last year’s review of this Warrant, the article has support from the majority of appointed, elected and non-elected Town officials, as well as Department leaders.  Last year’s Town Meeting vote of approval allowed the Town’s automatic 6 step wage increase, for non-union employees, replaced by a merit based system with annual performance evaluations.  Proponents of this Article argued that 6 percent Step increases based on nothing but time, along with annual COLAs was a costly and potentially demotivating production.  In past, a typical annual increase for a Town non-union member employee who had not reached the maximum Step would be a 6 percent raise, along with COLA.  In FY 14, this employee will earn a 3.25 percent wage increase if performance marks are met. 

This will be the first full year the Town implements this program.  Merit pay will be based upon performance evaluations with set standards and goals determined for each employee by their supervisor and the Town Manager.  Although performance evaluations are not yet completed, funding for the anticipated increased costs is required.  In order to fund potential wage increases, our Town Manager, Finance Director, and Human Resource Director have budgeted as follows:

• FY 2014 COLA at 2 percent, consistent with the Town’s bargaining pattern, is $94,212.
• Estimated Merit Pay based upon performance evaluations, $58,887.
• Three Job classification Re-grades deemed appropriate, $22,926
• A 1.45 percent associated Medicare Tax, $2,553
• Total, $178,578

Last year, the Advisory Committee made clear its understanding that implementing this proposed new wage scale and merit system required a well- developed assessment tool, along with an evolutionary process for calibrating measuring devices.  The ADCOM reminds all that the success of this program demands oversight and regular reviews by Town Management, Town Meeting members, appointed and elected officials.

This article proposes the funding for the collective bargaining agreement negotiated by and between the Town of Foxborough and the Foxborough Police Department for fiscal years 2013, 2014, and 2015. The proposed agreement would cover the period from July 1, 2012 through June 30, 2015. Additional costs for respective town budgets are $32,508 for FY2013, $209,957 for FY2014, and $406,165 for FY2015. Of note:

Article V, Section A – Changes are being proposed that eliminate an antiquated out of date personal sick time policy and adopt a traditional time accrual policy which is consistent with policies in place for police departments in the 15 local towns benchmarked against. Changes will allow for a policy that can be easier managed and planned for while eliminating the possibility of sick time policy abuse and the unpredictable costs associated with such.

Article V, Section C – The implementation of wellness program for police officers is established. This program will have no ill effect on operating budgets or service levels. The program is positive in the sense that it promotes physical and mental wellness and will help officers be prepared for and overcome obstacles they face on a daily basis.

Article VII – Addresses the inequity of officer’s salary and wages as compared to the 15 local police departments benchmarked against. Changes as detailed below will allow for base salaries to increase from current levels, the bottom 20th percentile, to the 65th percentile goal over a 3 year period. This proposed adjustment is in line with the policy direction from the Board of Selectmen. Specific changes:

• 2 percent Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) for FY2013
• 2 percent Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) for FY2014
• Patrolman base pay increase of $3,864 and Sergeant base pay increase of $6,078 for FY2014
• 2 percent Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) for FY2015
• Patrolman base pay increase of $3,942 and Sergeant base pay increase of $6,199 for FY2015

Article XII – This is an acknowledgement that the Town can change its health insurance plan under the Massachusetts Health Insurance Reform Statute. This change supports the Town’s goal to reduce its healthcare costs and brings this union in line with similar provisions for other Town employees. It is difficult to project the total savings from this change (since the new healthcare program is still under discussion), but the savings are estimated to be about $400 (single) and $1,000 (family) per policy.

Article XXI – Allows for a modest increase in detail rate of $1 per hour each year for the next 3 years keeping rates consistent with rates of the 15 local police departments benchmarked against and in line with the policy direction from the Board of Selectmen.

The purpose of this article is to see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate or transfer from available funds amounts requested to amend Article 4 of the May 12, 2012, FY 2013 Annual Operating Budget and Article 5 of the May 14, 2012, FY 2013 Annual Capital Budget to fund expenses associated with the following: Underfunded Sewer Enterprise Expense budget; And to change the “free Cash Loans” portion of the Funding Source for the Fire Engine Replacement to “Ambulance Receipts.”

This Article proposed by the Town Manager with approval of the Financial Director is more of a housekeeping responsibility from last year’s budget.  Sewer Enterprise expenses are generally estimates.  At year’s end, the Sewer Enterprise Expenses had been underfunded by $65,000.  The acceptance of this Article would adjust this amount from Sewer Retained Earnings as a Funding source.

Also last year, monies were allocated in order to place a bid on a Fire Engine.  The Town’s Ambulance Receipts, from where we fund such expenditures, did not have the amount needed at that time to place the bid.  This required $361,000 to be financed through Fire Capital as the funding sources.  The acceptance of this warrant allows the funding to be changed through Ambulance receipts back into Fire Capital.

To authorize the spending of funds or fees collected through various related sources to a maximum amount as indicated.

The funding of our Qualified OPEB (Other Post Employment Benefits) Trust fund is now a perennial warrant article at Annual Town Meeting. 

Beginning at the ATM in May of 2010, the town complied with the GASB (Governmental Accounting Standard Board) requirement that the unfunded liability for healthcare and other post employment benefits, which had been extended to employees of the Town of Foxborough, must be recorded in its financial statements. 

In order to prevent the cost of these promised benefits from growing larger and larger as a percentage of the town's annual budget, the OPEB Trust fund was established. 

As this fund grows, it will serve to defray the growing burden of post employment benefits in future years.

This Article would increase the Town’s Stabilization Fund by an additional $150,000. 

The Stabilization Fund is a reserve fund established for the purpose of use during times of financial difficulty.  It is also viewed by the Rating Agencies as a measure of fiscal soundness of the Town.

The proposed amount would increase the Town’s Stabilization Account to a level that is viewed very favorably by the rating agencies during the bond underwriting process.  

Both the Advisory Committee and Finance Director believe that it is important to maintain the Stabilization Fund at an amount that satisfies the Rating Agencies which in turn keeps borrowing costs lower for current and future bond offerings.

To amend by the deletion and replacement to the Revised Consolidated Personnel By-Laws with updated and current Federal and State language.

This article closes the book financially on the High School Renovation project debt at $10,400,000 by not allowing any more borrowing against the unissued balance for the project total of $19,887,694 voted at the May 2009 town meeting.

The purpose of this article is to see if the Town will authorize the Town Manager to expend any funds received from the State and/or County for construction, reconstruction, or any other highway improvements or related activities. 

This Article is proposed by the Town Manager.

Town Meeting’s vote to approve this Article authorizes the Town Manager’s to accept and spend monies annually provided by the State and/or County for highway expenditures. 

This vote is to ensure that the Town accepts respective State/County funding for such expenditures and that the Town Manager spends these monies appropriately.

If passed, this article would impose the burdens of an optional, 10-15 percent more stringent "Stretch Energy Code," upon all homeowners and business property owners in the Town.  

The Town would thereafter be permanently committed to complying with all subsequent revisions of the Stretch Energy Code, which is intended to at all times remain 10-15 percent more stringent than the contemporaneous base energy code found in the Massachusetts building code.

Members of the Advisory Committee spoke with the state official responsible for the implementation of the Green Communities Program.  

That discussion informed the Advisory Committee that the Stretch Energy Code would place the Town on a more onerous track of energy efficiency requirements.  

When, or soon after, the base energy code of the Massachusetts building code is revised every three years, the alternative Stretch Energy Code is also revised to be 10-15 percent more energy efficient than the base energy code.  

Municipalities electing the Stretch Energy Code are automatically subject to the new requirements of the new Stretch Energy Code upon promulgation of each revision.  

The Stretch Energy Code imposes significant additional burdens on homeowners undertaking either new home construction, home renovations involving alteration of wall space, and construction of home additions.

As to funding, there is no guarantee that any particular amount of funding for any particular program would be made available to a town electing the five energy efficiency burdens of the Green Communities Program, of which only one is the Stretch Energy Code.

Money is not provided to a Green Communities Program in a single grant; rather, the Town, once all five of the burdens are complied with, would have to go back to the Commonwealth and re-apply for each particular initiative for which funding was sought, and any funds made available would be issued only to the limited extent that the Commonwealth approved limited funds for the particular initiative in question.  

In other words, merely becoming a Green Communities Program municipality is no guarantee that any funds will be made available for any initiative.

The Advisory Committee takes the position that at this time it is not in the best interests of the Town to elect to place all homeowners and business property owners on the separate energy efficiency track of the Stretch Energy Code, and that the uncertain and ambiguous availability of funding pursuant to the Green Communities Program does nothing to alter this judgment.  

Therefore, the Advisory Committee, by a vote of 0-7-1, recommends a vote of NO on this article.

This Article would set aside funds to complete the Town’s Master Plan, which began in Fiscal 2012 ($125,000 appropriated at May 2011 TM) based upon a preliminary estimate before work commenced. 

Significant work has been completed and the amount being requested ($56,500) would finish the work which would include the Master Plan, Economic Development Plan, a Downtown Strategy, re-write of the Zoning By-Laws, and Land Use recommendations.

The purpose of this article is to see if the town will vote to accept the provisions of Massachusetts general Laws c.44 s.55C establishing a Municipal Affordable Housing Trust.

The proposed Trust would be managed by 7 members appointed by the Board of Selectmen and governed under open Meeting Laws. 

The Trust would have an expiration date of July 1, 2016 and/or brought back to Town Meeting for extension.

This Article proposed by the Town Planning Board is primarily an effort to provide for the creation and preservation of affordable housing in town for the benefit of low and moderate-income persons. 

Researching Towns with similar Trusts, along with language from the law itself indicates that the goal of an Affordable Housing Trust is to create more affordable housing and/or to meet the objective of 10 percent of the Town’s housing as “affordable."

We may debate the social values of this objective versus the financial impact that affordable housing may bear in a developed or soon-to-be developed area, but the law is clear and affordable housing is a reality. 

The Planning Board believes that managing prospective affordable housing is a better control mechanism than having it thrust upon the community with little to no say. 

In other words, do you want the Town to determine where affordable housing will be created or a private developer and statute?

This brings us to the secondary effort on the minds of the Planning Board and Town officials: Chestnut Green. 

The Town has had the initial and a second interested developer walk away from this site for financial reasons concerning the inability to sell units, along with the affordable housing requirements. 

The project has stalled along with the promises the Town would realize from Chestnut Green. 

In efforts to breathe life back into development, the Planning Board believes that the use of a “temporary” Municipal Affordable Housing Trust and a third developer can help complete that project in the best interests of the Town, while finding, creating, and developing affordable housing to satisfy the State requirements.

The ADCOM had many questions for the Planning Board, Town Manager, and officials on this Article.  I am sure many citizens will and should also have questions at Town Meeting surrounding the intricacies of this Article. 

Town officials must be ready to explain how the primary and secondary reasons for this proposed Trust works for the Town. 

Will an Affordable Housing Board of Trustees manage this in the best interest of the Town’s social and financial future? 

Is there room for abuse, and if so, how is the Town protected? Why is there a 3-year sunset clause if we believe the 7 Trustees, appointed by the Board of Selectmen, will manage effectively? 

Although not unanimous by vote, the ADCOM believes that this Trust and effort is best for the Town.

This change makes the opens space residential developments more compatible with the other developments in the R-40 district.

Additionally it changes set back requirements to be measured from lot lines and not between dwellings making it fairer and clearer to homeowners.

Amend Zoning By-Laws

To amend and correct second A. in subsection 2. to 9.3.2.1

This article simply changes the caption on the referenced table to accurately reflect the contents of the table. There is no change to the meaning of the By-Law.

This article simply changes the caption on the referenced table to accurately reflect the contents of the table. There is no change to the meaning of the By-Law.

If passed, this article would clean up and clarify language in Section 3.2.2 of the Zoning By-Laws.

Members of the Advisory Committee spoke with members of the Zoning Board of Appeals concerning this article.  

The first reason for amending Section 3.2.2 is to ensure that the wording in the various subsections, which currently reference "principal residence," "principal dwelling," and "principal building," become solely a consistent reference to "principal residence."  

The second reason for amending Section 3.2.2 is to clarify in Subsection 4 that not more than two individuals other than family members (each of which family members must reside in the principal residence) may be employed in the home occupation, and to clarify in Subsection 6 that the prohibition as to external structure alterations is restricted to the principal residence and any building that is accessory to the principal residence.

Both Subsection 4 and Subsection 6 will, through this article, be clarified but in no way alter the way in which the Zoning Board of Appeals has, in the past, imposed each of these standards when considering a home occupation request.

Performance of any intensive home occupation will remain impermissible without the granting of a Special Permit by the Zoning Board of Appeals, and Section 3.2.2 contains the "standard" that the Zoning Board of Appeals considers as to a proposed intensive home occupation (and, if one is approved, constitute restrictions that the Zoning Board of Appeals impose with respect to performance of that occupation).

This Article would make necessary changes to Section 10.2.2 subsection 3 of the zoning by-laws to align them with decisions under current case law.

Recommendation available at Town Meeting

The purpose of this article is to see if the Town will vote to amend the Zoning By-Laws in section 5.3 by deleting existing language and replacing it with new language that should provide clarification to nonconforming structures that are not single or two family residential structures. 

The intent is to provide clear wording and measure on regulations, variances, and the Special Permit process by which one may apply, or appeal.

This amendment should promote consistency and clarification to current zoning laws.

The Zoning board of Appeals has advocated for this amendment. The ADCOM, along with General Counsel and Building Commissioner see no risk in these amendments, as there is no substantial change other than providing consistency and clarification to language in the subsections.

This Article asks the Town to approve a TIF for Invensys (the Company). 

A TIF is an agreement in which the Town will abate all or a portion of real estate taxes on new investments made by a current or proposed business coming into the community. 

In the case of Invensys, the company plans to invest up to approximately $30 million in new infrastructure improvements on two properties they occupy on Neponset Ave and Cocasset Street in the Town of Foxborough. 

Their current taxes will continue to be calculated and paid under the current process for all taxpayers.  However, the assessed value of this new investment will be assessed but the Company will receive an abatement for the taxes due on this new investment for a period of fifteen years. 

Under the TIF Agreement the Company would pay zero incremental real estate taxes for the first four years of the agreement and would begin to pay the assessed taxes on a sliding scale basis over the remaining eleven years of the TIF Agreement. 

By the end of the 15th year, the whole property, including the new investment, would be taxed at its full assessment.

The benefit to the Town in agreeing to the TIF is to retain a significant employer, who has a highly skilled, high wage labor force right here in Foxborough. 

In addition, the Town would continue to receive other economic benefit through meals and hotel taxes paid by the Company through employee patronage and business meetings held in Foxborough. 

Finally, the Town would receive additional permitting fees projected to be in excess of $400,000.

The TIF Committee and the Board of Selectman unanimously supported the TIF Agreement.

Recommendation available at Town Meeting

Research of this article has determined that it is redundant in light of the easement warrant article passed at Special Town Meeting in Fall 2011.

Members of the 2013 Foxborough Advisory Committee:

• Lawrence (Larry) P. Thomas (Chairman)
• Paul DeFazio (Vice Chairman)
• Monica Fisler  (Clerk)
• George Leonard
• John Spinney
• Robert Garber (Resigned to run for elective office)     
• Jeffrey K. Anderson
• Kevin Powers
• Natalia Stasiewicz
• John Gray (Resigned to run for elective office)
• Tracy Metvier
• Howard Siegal
• Larry Stern
• George Adler