Brentwood budget committee reviews bond schedule, tax-cap scenarios as town prepares budget cycle

The Brentwood Budget Committee reviewed a town treasurer's summary of municipal bonds and modeled borrowing scenarios Tuesday as the committee prepares department targets for the 2026 budget. Committee members and staff discussed how scheduled payoffs will free up appropriations under the town's 4% tax-cap framework and how different loan structures would affect near-term tax pressure.

The committee's review showed a remaining principal balance across the town's active bonds of about $1,300,000. Using the treasurer's schedule, the committee reported a total town debt-payment estimate of $244,641 in 2026 and noted that the schedule yields a drop of $36,173 from 2025. Over the next seven years the committee's spreadsheet indicated roughly $249,694 in debt-payment reductions, and a single-year reduction of roughly $118,520 projected by 2028. Those amounts, the presenter said, represent "freed up" appropriations that can be used without increasing the tax-rate under the 4% cap.

Committee members discussed two common municipal amortization approaches the New Hampshire Municipal Bond Bank provides: a level-principal schedule (larger early principal payments, lower long-term interest but higher short-term tax impact) and a level-debt schedule (principal plus interest more even across years, higher total interest but steadier tax impact). Using examples requested by the fire department, the committee ran scenarios for $3 million, $4 million and $5 million loans. For illustration, a $3 million, 30-year level-debt loan produced a first-year payment around $190,000; on a 20-year schedule the first-year payment rose to roughly $247,600. For a $5 million loan the committee's examples produced approximate payments of $315,000 (30-year) and $411,000 (20-year).

On the tax-cap side, staff walked the committee through assumptions used to set appropriation targets: a 5% annual revenue-growth assumption (noted as slightly conservative versus a 5.9% average since 2020) and small annual adjustments for veterans' credits and overlay used for abatements. Using those assumptions the committee estimated a maximum appropriation increase for 2026 of about $313,281 while staying within the 4% tax-cap, though members noted that select-board warrant articles or voter action could alter the effective outcome.

The committee also reviewed encumbrances and their effect on the top-line appropriation. Staff cited RSA 32:7 as governing encumbrances and said contractually encumbered amounts are tracked separately and do not flow into the 2025 appropriation total. As an example, $35,000 for SALT material ordered but not yet delivered was described as a contractually encumbered amount that carries forward but does not change the 2025 appropriation line.

Committee members used the presentations to propose process changes for the coming budget season: earlier department-level targets, more department walk-throughs (site visits) with department heads, and joint communication with the select board to coordinate targets and timelines under the new tax-cap environment. The committee voted to approve routine minutes and scheduled a follow-up meeting for August 18; no formal borrowing decisions were made at the session.

Ending: Committee members said they will continue to refine revenue assumptions and will ask departments to work to targets set early in the fall so the committee and the select board can avoid mid-cycle reopenings. Staff noted that any borrowing plan for a new municipal complex or fire station must balance short-term tax impact and long-term debt-service costs under the 4% rule.