Hubbardston select board interviews three town administrator finalists, postpones hiring decision

The Hubbardston Select Board on May 11 conducted final interviews with three finalists for town administrator, pressing candidates on how they would confront a regional school budget that now consumes roughly 60% of the town’s annual spending, how they would shepherd a proposed municipal complex to a fall special town meeting and how they would position the town for possible MBTA-adjacent impacts.

Board Chair Jeff Williams opened the session by laying out the format: each board member would ask one question, candidates could give detailed answers and follow-ups would be allowed before the board deliberated. Candidates addressed budgeting, staffing turnover, economic strategy that preserves Hubbardston’s rural character, and the town’s water resources.

Why it matters: Hubbardston faces constrained revenue growth under Proposition 2½ while school assessments from the Quabbin Regional School District continue to rise. The board is preparing to present a multi‑million‑dollar municipal complex to voters this fall and must also weigh zoning and infrastructure implications if nearby MBTA-related development expands.

On school budgets, one board member said the district “take[s] 61 to 62% of our total budget,” pressing the candidates for approaches to negotiate or collaborate. Candidate Alex (as introduced in the meeting) urged early, structured collaboration among the select board, school committee, superintendent and finance committee, describing a model used in Arlington in which both town and school agreed on fixed annual growth rates. “We agreed on growth numbers that they were going to grow… and the town side we increased our budget at 3.25%,” Alex said, calling the approach a planning tool that smoothed multi‑year budgeting.

Candidates recommended different tactics to manage scarce resources. Allison highlighted tighter line‑item budgeting and staff training, saying some solutions take years rather than months: “It doesn't get solved in 6 months. It doesn't get solved in one year.” Elizabeth, who cited experience running budget hearings and working with finance committees, described vetting departmental line items, exploring zero‑based budgeting when appropriate, and pursuing grant‑writing partnerships to increase revenue.

On the proposed municipal complex, candidates emphasized updated cost estimates, strong outreach and a long runway of public engagement ahead of town meeting. One candidate recommended verifying the current $5.5 million to $7.5 million cost estimates and preparing materials to explain long‑term benefits and tax impacts to voters.

The board also queried candidates about the town’s water resources and state advocacy. Candidates suggested building relationships with state legislators, forming coalitions with neighboring towns and researching previous state advocacy efforts to press for fairer compensation for water supplied to other communities.

Board members confirmed procedural limits for deliberations: discussion of candidates in public is allowed, but contract negotiations would take place in executive session if the board proceeds to bargaining. After brief discussion, the board agreed that several members were not yet ready to make a hiring decision and set a follow‑up meeting for Friday at 6:30 p.m. A motion to adjourn the interview session was made and seconded; the meeting was closed with plans to reconvene Friday.

What’s next: The Select Board will meet Friday at 6:30 p.m. to continue deliberations on the town administrator search and to finalize any decision or move toward executive session for contract negotiation if they select a finalist.