Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Senior Services Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Charlestown senior center reports rising attendance, asks budget committee to clarify state reimbursements
Summary
The Charlestown Senior Center told the town budget committee it served more people last year, expanded class offerings and seeks modest budget changes to reflect staffing limits, a rising generator maintenance cost and state reimbursements that offset expenses.
Jennifer (Senior Center administrator) told the Charlestown Town Council budget committee that the center recorded an unduplicated attendance of just over 1,000 people last year and expanded programs after moving to full‑time operations.
She said the center hired an administrative and programming assistant and added classes that drew steady participation: “We had a really great year last year. Moving to full time has been great. We hired a new administrative and programming assistant, and she's been wonderful.”
The presentation matters because the center’s staffing and program decisions are tied to the town budget. The center reported higher program revenue and asked the committee to show offsetting state reimbursements in the budget so expense lines are easier to interpret.
Jennifer summarized program-level details: the center offers multiple mat and chair‑yoga classes that fill the room (one chair class seats roughly 28 people), a Tai Chi class with about 18 regular participants, an evidence‑based fall‑prevention course (Matter of Balance), and an AARP tax‑assistance program that provides weekly appointments. She told the committee the center’s lunch program — slowest to return after COVID — served over a thousand more meals than pre‑pandemic levels last year.
On finance and staffing, Jennifer said the center’s administrative assistant is limited by retirement rules and can work only about 20 hours, which reduces hours in the personal‑service budget lines. She also described several expense pressures: generator maintenance costs rose (the town’s generator contractor changed names; the existing contract includes an option to renew), janitorial and kitchen supplies climbed, and some program contract costs increased.
The center reported program revenue of $16,005.36 through 12/31 (Jennifer provided a supplemental sheet), plus state‑designated funding that the center considers an offset to expenses. The committee and staff debated how to display that state reimbursement in the town budget: should it show as revenue or as an offset to the expense line? Council members asked for the budget packet to include notes on any offsetting revenue so program expenses and reimbursements are visible together.
Committee members raised other practical items: the center charges a $10 annual membership fee (a second year for the center), and some trips or outings would be charged to participants to offset bus or admission costs. Jennifer said trip demand is modest and typically organized in partnership with other local organizations.
What’s next: Budget committee members asked staff to (1) show program revenues alongside program expenses in the budget materials, (2) note the state reimbursement amount separately (so the committee can model budget risk if the state amount is reduced), and (3) consider program revenue trends when reviewing requests for additional program funding or trips.
Ending: The committee thanked Jennifer for the report and asked for budget follow‑up showing the center’s expenses, program revenues and the state reimbursement treatment before final budget adoption.
