Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Advisory board presses for clearer RFP and bigger consultant budget as draft spending plan circulates
Summary
Advisory board members said the consultant RFP is close but still in procurement review, and debated a draft budget that includes staff time reimbursement, wastewater analysis, legal invoices and community storytelling; consultant estimates ranged from about $150,000–$400,000 and many line items remain TBD.
Speaker 1 opened discussion of a circulated draft budget and asked for subcommittee feedback before the select board presentation. Town staff are preparing a proposed budget that would allow the town to invoice for retroactive staff time and reimburse that work; legal invoices for MCI work would also be eligible, staff said. The draft contains several line items marked 'TBD.'
Staff reported that procurement is still reviewing the consultant RFP but that it is close to issuance. Several members said they would prefer waiting until the RFP is finalized before doing broader outreach so respondents see a clear scope. A staff speaker said, "we're definitely close," on issuing the RFP.
Committee members disagreed about how much to allocate for consultant services. One staff summary of a consulting contact estimated the work could be "not more than $200,000," while another participant and a referenced consultant named Scott said they expect the work to cost substantially more, "closer to $400,000." The group did not resolve that disagreement and left the consultant line open for further input.
The draft budget also includes proposed uses beyond consultant planning: wastewater analysis inputs that an engineer (Alan Cathcart) has already begun; potential reimbursement to an enterprise fund for prior wastewater work; and a short-term community engagement/storytelling line to fund temporary art, historical photography and similar activities. Speaker 4 described the storytelling line as a set of small projects rather than a single vendor.
Staff emphasized timing constraints tied to fiscal year deadlines and noted some consultant tasks are intentionally staged to run beyond June 30, with additional funds anticipated for those later tasks. The committee was asked to deliver feedback ahead of a select board discussion scheduled for mid-month.
What’s next: subcommittees were asked to review the draft and send comments to staff via email so the chair and staff can refine the budget before the select board presentation.
