BRENTWOOD TOWN — The Brentwood Town Budget Committee on Jan. 7 approved multiple operating budgets for 2026 and voted to use a 4% revenue-growth estimate when calculating next year’s tax-cap, producing a recommended maximum appropriation of $7,516,583 to present to the Select Board.

The committee approved the Select Board’s proposed Information Systems budget of $90,049 after a discussion about reallocating support charges between hardware and software and a $2,290 server hardware purchase. Moderator Speaker 4 read the Select Board’s figure: “The proposed budget from the Select Board for Information Systems for 2026 is $90,049.” The motion to adopt the information-systems budget carried unanimously on a motion and second.

Members then approved the insurance and benefits budget at $520,654. Select-board and subcommittee work produced plan-design changes the committee said reduced overall cost; Speakers explained the town moved to a three-plan contribution structure (the committee described it as a 100/80/80 method) and noted the change produced fewer enrollments in the previously higher-cost plan and a higher deductible for many employees. The committee opened discussion about whether to pursue a true high-deductible/HSA-eligible option in future years.

The committee approved recycling and waste-collection/disposal appropriations: recycling at $150,203 and waste collection/disposal at $560,585. Committee members and the moderator discussed a Select Board plan for six months automated pickup and six months manual pickup and noted the Select Board plans a warrant article to fund six months of manual pickup. Speaker 2 emphasized prior-year accounting for ARPA funds and told the committee that earlier ARPA entries were handled incorrectly; as a result, roughly $90,000 of ARPA remained to be applied and the Select Board intends to split about $45,000 to offset recycling increases in 2025 and 2026. As Speaker 2 put it, “It just looks big because of this thing that was done wrong last year.”

The assessing budget of $58,531 was approved after committee members discussed the town’s assessor arrangement and the expected number of days the contracted assessor will be on-site (the committee referenced about three days per month on average). The government-buildings budget of $80,206 also passed; the line-item conversation covered custodial services (a contracted custodial-services line replacing a wages line), one-off repairs such as ice-dam remediation and the possibility of a grant-plus-town-match for repairs to the Grange (a town-owned building).

The committee spent substantial time on next year’s revenue estimate used to set the tax-cap. Speaker 4 summarized the methodology and said she and the town administrator were comfortable using a 4% growth estimate while documenting the calculation, noting NHMA and DRA guidance that the method be transparent. The committee then moved, seconded and approved using a 4% revenue increase for the tax-cap calculation; Speaker 4 said she would present the recommendation to the Select Board. The committee’s adoption of 4% produced a recommended maximum appropriation of $7,516,583.

Votes at a glance
- Information Systems budget ($90,049): motion moved by Speaker 6, seconded by Speaker 3 — approved.
- Insurance & benefits ($520,654): motion moved and seconded — approved.
- Recycling ($150,203): motion moved and seconded — approved.
- Waste collection/disposal ($560,585): motion moved and seconded — approved.
- Assessing ($58,531): motion moved by Speaker 6, seconded by Speaker 4 — approved.
- Government buildings ($80,206): motion moved and seconded — approved.
- Revenue estimate for tax-cap (4%): motion moved by Speaker 2, seconded by Speaker 4 — approved; recommended maximum appropriation $7,516,583 to present to the Select Board.

What matters next
The Select Board will receive the Budget Committee’s 4% revenue recommendation and the committee’s approved operating totals; several warrant-article proposals remain under consideration for town meeting, including manual recycling funding and potential capital warrants referenced by the Select Board and school board. Committee members flagged the need to confirm where ARPA funds were reported in prior-year filings and recommended the town administrator and auditors clarify whether and how those federal funds appear on DRA/April forms so future revenue calculations are accurate.

Reporting notes
At several points speakers used the label and segment numbering from the meeting transcript (Speaker 1–8 here). Where the transcript records only votes of “Aye” without a recorded roll-call tally, this report notes the committee’s recorded outcome and the mover/second recorded in the meeting rather than reconstructing a full roll-call tally.