Marlborough unveils FY2026/27 budget; residents cite steep tax hits after revaluation

Marlborough's Board of Finance held its first annual budget public hearing on April 20, 2026, during which Town Manager David Porter presented the proposed fiscal year 2026/27 budget and described the principal cost drivers.

Porter told attendees that the budget is being pushed up by personnel salary increases and a 21% jump in health insurance costs, plus a market salary adjustment for the Senior Center director, expanded Senior Center programming, two new staff positions, software purchases for the Tax Collector, Assessor and GIS, higher energy and election expenses, contracted maintenance of three cemeteries, and the first lease payment on a new firetruck. He also listed offsets, including fewer audit expenses as audits are brought current, sharing the Finance Director with the Town of Woodbridge (with a grant applied for to help cover salary costs), and lower workers'compensation costs. Capital projects named included culvert repairs on Quinn Road and Johnson Road, roof replacements at Town Hall and Public Works and the Senior Center, renovations at Fire House #2, Food Bank exterior painting, a transfer-station compactor and a Ford F450 vehicle.

Porter said the recent revaluation affects individual taxpayers differently and explained how residents can compare year-over-year changes; he added that motor vehicle taxes are expected to fall because the town's mill rate will be lower under the new property values.

During the public-comment period residents offered multiple examples of sharply higher property-tax bills after the revaluation. Cliff Denniss said his assessment rose despite no home improvements and that the proposed numbers result in an approximately 23% tax increase for him; John Stimpson said his assessment rose by $155,000, producing a roughly $1,500 tax increase; and Allen Miller said his assessment rose 25% with an estimated $1,800 tax increase. Others said commercial values rose less than residential values in the revaluation and urged the town to pursue a larger commercial tax base.

Several attendees criticized the timing of the ballot printing. Deb Bourbeau said she submitted a letter to the local paper and that ballots were being printed before residents had a fair opportunity to review the budget and ask questions at the hearing; Anthony Bratz, speaking as an individual rather than as a Board of Selectmen member, also said the printing timeline disadvantaged voters and questioned why a more substantial RHAM windfall (described at the hearing as more than $600,000) was not applied to lower the proposed tax increases.

The hearing closed at 7:53 p.m. No votes were taken at the session; the proposed budget will proceed to the ballot as scheduled unless the town takes a separate procedural step to delay or modify that timeline.