Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Coventry residents press council on raises, pensions and police overtime during budget hearing
Summary
Residents questioned recent retention raises and their effect on long-term pension liabilities, while town staff said annual actuarial recommendations are being funded; council staff also discussed a proposed $15,000 allocation for a special election, annex renovation grant funding and police overtime hiring.
Residents at a Coventry town budget hearing on Monday pressed the council about retention raises, pension funding and police overtime, while town staff said the municipality is funding actuarially recommended pension contributions and planning a $15,000 budget adjustment for a possible special election.
At the public-comment portion of the hearing, Britney Boyer, of 318 Towne Farm Road, said she was “extremely disappointed” by low in‑person turnout and raised concerns that large retention raises for employees nearing retirement could increase long‑term pension payouts.
“With some of these raises being so high, it almost seems like that may be almost strategic, kind of aimed at maximizing pension benefits, for soon to be retirees,” Boyer said.
Town staff responded that multiple pay rules apply depending on collective bargaining units and that some employees participate in defined‑contribution plans rather than defined‑benefit pensions. A town staff member said raises cited in the budget were intended to compensate employees for additional duties and to keep the municipality competitive with neighboring jurisdictions.
The town’s finance representation told the hearing the town budgets 100% of the actuarially determined contribution (ADC) and cited the most recent valuation dated 06/30/2024. That staff member said the police pension line includes “in excess of $6,000,000” in contributions and that the town funds the ADC across departmental lines.
Resident Robert Heavey questioned whether the meeting had a valid quorum; the solicitor’s office told the public the meeting met the town’s quorum rules and that the council had accepted legal advice that the proceedings were proper.
Other public commenters pressed budget details the council will take up at an upcoming meeting. Town staff said they planned to add $15,000 in the working budget for a potential special election and would offset that by reducing a line in the Department of Public Works (DPW) budget and replacing the amount with available impact‑fee revenue. Staff said recalculating that change reduced the projected tax increase from 1.6 to 1.48, which they estimated at roughly $96–$97 a year for a $400,000 house.
On the annex renovation, staff said the $4,500,000 renovation is covered by grant funding and that the line item in the operating budget covers routine maintenance and repairs for the existing annex (described in the hearing as approximately 100,000 square feet). Staff also said about 40,000 square feet of renovated space will be programmed for health monitoring, education and workforce development; they said program funding for year one would include about $100,000 and that partnerships with other governmental organizations are expected to reduce net operating impact.
Resident Sue Reynolds flagged police overtime and hiring as a public‑safety and budget concern. “We were in February, 70.7 percent of the overtime budget was used, with four months to go,” Reynolds said, and said overtime had been significantly over budget in prior years. Town staff said recent and scheduled hires — including one graduation and several new recruits planned later in the year — should reduce overtime and that most police details are paid for by private contractors, with the town charging the contractor for the detail and vehicle use.
The hearing included routine procedural votes: the council approved meeting minutes and subsequently closed public comment and the undocketed‑items portion of the hearing. The council recessed the budget hearing to continue review at the next council meeting, which staff said will be the primary venue to make line‑item changes.
Votes at a glance: - Approval of previous meeting minutes — Passed, 3–0 (Council member Brown: yes; Council member Capaldi: yes; Vice President Verducci: yes) - Motion to close public comment on the hearing — Passed, 3–0 - Motion to close public comment on undocketed items — Passed, 3–0 - Motion to adjourn — Passed (voice vote)
The council indicated it will continue the budget process at the next scheduled meeting, where council members may propose line‑by‑line changes and formalize any reallocations discussed during the hearing.
