The Marion Finance Committee voted on April 10 to rescind a prior recommendation that taxpayers vote at the May 13 Annual Town Meeting to split the financing of the town’s new patrol boat between $400,000 from debt and $400,000 from free cash. The committee then voted to recommend that the $800,000 boat be purchased entirely on debt that would be funded by the town’s Waterways Account.
Finance Committee Chairman Shay Assad’s motivation in bringing the decision to the members stems from the Select Board’s decision to add a second option for voters to the Town Meeting warrant, one that came at Assad’s urgent recommendation because he insists that should the town allocate from free cash to pay for the harbormaster’s new patrol boat, a promise will have been broken. He has repeatedly expressed concern that the much-needed boat might fail at Town Meeting.
A third unanimous vote was taken to recommend that the town form an independent commission, including members of the FinCom, the Marine Resources Commission, Town Counsel and other potential members to thoroughly examine the town’s Waterway’s Account and provide a report to the Select Board.
In speaking to the FinCom, Assad said that until March 27, the town had planned to fund the boat entirely out of the Waterways Account, the revenue-driven account that thrives on harbor-related fees. That plan changed at the 11th hour, said Assad, at which point he felt the town was treading in a dangerous direction.
Assad said that while the town turned down the schools’ request for money to fund teachers they said they need, the town somehow was going to come up with money to fund a patrol boat.
“That doesn’t quite seem to make sense, right?” asked Assad to the committee. “Certainly not to the school committee, who thought the town didn’t have any money. But it turns out we did.”
The question, Assad said, came up how to fund the patrol boat, noting that there was no disputing the need for the boat. He made sure to compliment the Harbormaster Department and said “It was never an issue of we versus them.”
Assad asserted that until March 27, all stakeholders were in agreement that the town would buy the patrol boat on debt.
“That changed at the last minute, and we said to (Town Administrator) Geoff (Gorman), ‘Look, we’ve got the cash so it’s not like we can’t do it. But this is going to be on heck of an issue at Town Meeting because there are a number of taxpayers who … are passionate about who should be funding the needs of the Waterways (Account),’” said Assad. “And the reality is that anybody who has a mooring knows that a town mooring is an absolute steal” compared to a retail mooring which he says costs 25 times the price of a public mooring.
For that reason, Assad said he does not have a lot of sympathy for boaters when fees increase.
Assad reported that the Select Board decided to add a second article to the warrant for the May 13 Annual Town Meeting, giving the voters the original option of paying for the boat via debt funded by the Waterways Account. An article already existed in which the town would use $400,000 of Waterways funds and $400,000 of free cash.
With that, he tasked the Finance Committee to rescind its recommendation of the original article and then, in a second step, vote on either an all-debt scenario or the split as outlined above.
Committee members asked why not split between debt and Waterways, but Assad said the Select Board had already closed the warrant so that option is not on the table.
Assad said he understands the Select Board’s position and agrees that depleting the Waterways Fund is not a good idea.
Vin Malkoski, the chairman of the Marine Resources Commission, was invited to speak and referenced prior discussion with Assad over the MRC’s ongoing contention that the town has “inappropriately taken Waterways funds and put them in the General Fund.”
Malkoski said the fact of that matter, though lost over time, has been legally proven to have occurred.
Assad argued that the town has made it known for years that all departments will share in expenses that go across the entire town. Malkoski sought to clarify that Assad has been made aware of the MRC’s position.
“That’s the position that the town took. Whether it’s legal or illegal, I haven’t talked to anybody who has told me, legally, … that what the town did over the last 10 or 15 or 20 years was illegal,” said Assad. “I think what the town did was they thought they were doing the appropriate thing to assess all of those costs that couldn’t be attributed to a specific department to be allocated across all those departments. That makes perfect accounting sense.”
“Unfortunately, it does not comply with state law,” said Malkoski.
Assad insisted they not talk about the legality of the matter until Town Counsel weighs in.
“The town can’t afford to report it, you can’t afford to fix the problem,” replied Malkoski, arguing that most town departments do not generate revenue. “The reason the law exists is for this exact purpose.”
Assad said the only way to fix the problem is to create an enterprise fund for the Waterways Department, something Malkoski said is not necessary. Assad said the decision would necessarily come from the Select Board with a recommendation from the Finance Committee.
Assad asserted that the creation of an enterprise fund would put the dispute to bed.
He then attempted to steer the committee back toward the decision at hand, to recommend the town fund the patrol boat entirely with debt or to fund it halfway with free cash as prescribed by the other article on the Town Meeting warrant.
Assad asked Malkoski which scenario suits the MRC, but the two could not reach an accord in the conversation due to the lack of resolution over what the impact should or will be on the Waterways Account.
Assad reminded Malkoski that the Select Board promised the voters that the patrol boat would be paid for out of the Waterways Account and asked him if he wants the town not to honor its commitment to the taxpayers. Malkoski retorted that he would like the town to honor its commitment “to the rate payers.”
Malkoski contended that the MRC’s plan to increase fees, something it did twice, was designed to bring back approximately $70,000 into the Waterways Account but said the town’s accounting has illegally limited that revenue to approximately $10,000 “because it was being siphoned out to pay for town hall maintenance.”
Citing the existence of $441,000 in the Waterways Account, Assad asked how the MRC accrued that much revenue under insufficient circumstances. Devoid of documented confirmation from Town Counsel, Assad characterized Malkoski’s assertion that the town has acted inappropriately as “an absurdity.” Malkoski stuck to his position that the Waterways Account has been mistreated by the town.
Assad apologized at the end of the meeting for getting “frosty” about the matter but hopes that a joint effort will end the long-standing disagreement between the MRC and the town government at large.
No date was set for the next meeting of the Marion Finance Committee.
Marion Finance Committee
By Mick Colageo