Winchester board moves budget changes, adds $50,000 for Pearson School roof engineering

Winchester — At a special meeting April 23, the Winchester Board of Selectmen approved multiple amendments to the town’s proposed fiscal-year 2026 budget, including a $250,000 transfer from the economic stabilization fund to cover bond issuance costs, addition of a $5,430,000 road-and-bridge capital line, targeted line-item cuts and a $50,000 allocation to the Board of Education for Pearson School roof engineering work.

The board voted unanimously to revise the budget as staff recommended. Town Manager Paul Harrington and Finance Director Ann Marie explained the recommended line edits were intended to cover near-term debt-service and issuance fees if the board authorized the second $8 million bond tranche earlier in the meeting. Ann Marie said the town's economic stabilization fund held approximately $591,000 and staff proposed transferring $250,000 into the budget as revenue and matching expense to cover interest-only payments, issuance fees and bond counsel costs.

Capital-schedule and operating adjustments - The board added item 30 on the capital schedule: a $5,430,000 road-and-bridge reconstruction line to be shown in the bond-funded column of the capital improvement schedule. Staff said this is a disclosure of project scope and funding source and will not change the general fund operating line while bond-funded. - The board approved two small operating reductions to move money elsewhere: a $10,000 reduction in the salt line (from $200,000 to $190,000) and a $15,000 reduction in health-insurance expense; both motions carried unanimously. - The board revised the proposed fund-balance allocation on the capital schedule from $700,000 to $725,000 (a $25,000 increase), and then approved adding $50,000 from fund balance to the Board of Education’s “critical project funding” line for Pearson School roof engineering costs.

Why the Pearson allocation matters Board members and staff discussed the leaking roof at Pearson School, options for repair and longer-term solutions. Staff and some board members said a full roof replacement is likely required rather than repeated coatings; the board discussed two paths to pay for a replacement: 1) pursue a state reimbursement program that could cover a portion (staff cited potential 50–72% ranges depending on program rules), which requires a formal RFP, state-approved engineering and an upfront local appropriation; or 2) pursue a rooftop solar agreement that bundles a roof replacement with solar installation paid through projected energy savings and third‑party financing.

Staff cautioned the state-reimbursement path requires an RFP and engineer (staff estimated initial engineering/RFP costs of roughly $50,000–$80,000), while the solar route could move faster but previously raised questions about performance guarantees and changing savings estimates. The board approved a $50,000 allocation to fund initial engineering/RFP work or to seed the BOE critical-project line while the options are vetted.

Budget context and fund-balance guidance Finance staff presented a fund-balance roll-forward showing the town’s undesignated fund balance near the Government Finance Officers Association guidance level of 16.7% of revenues. Staff said the proposed changes would leave the town near that guideline (staff estimated the percentage would remain above 16% after the recommended moves). Board members debated the trade-off between maintaining cushion for emergencies and using fund balance to advance capital projects and time-sensitive repairs.

Ending The board’s votes advanced the proposed FY2026 budget and created a short-term funding path to begin engineering work on Pearson School’s roof while staff continues to vet state reimbursement and solar options. Staff will return with any RFP scope, final engineering estimates and, if applicable, the timeline and terms of any third-party solar financing proposals.