Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Select Board hears FY26 report showing sharply reduced reserves; FEMA repayment options outlined
Summary
The Select Board was presented with FY26 results showing cash on hand fell to $345,803 and an unassigned fund balance of about $60,463 (≈4% of next year's budget). Finance staff outlined using available funds to clear a FEMA repayment or a formal deficit claim that would raise the municipal tax rate.
The Woodbury Select Board received a detailed end‑of‑year finance report on July 27 that showed cash on hand dropped to $345,803 and left the town with an unassigned fund balance of approximately $60,463, about 4% of the next fiscal year's budget.
The board's finance presenter (S5) said three events drove the decline: a FEMA reimbursement obligation, higher‑than‑expected equipment costs (notably a truck that cost far more than anticipated), and a prior tax‑rate calculation error. "The town completed FY '26 with a combined general fund and highway fund on budget," S5 said while reviewing the fund and budget dashboards.
S5 described two options for addressing a FEMA repayment obligation of roughly $104,216: use available restricted and assigned funds plus highway balances to eliminate the deficit now, or formally claim the deficit and add a one‑time tax adjustment that would spread recovery over taxpayers. Under the first option, S5 listed $10,992 in remaining FEMA 2024 funds, about $21,816 in town building maintenance funds (including $10,000 in Act 27 grant funds), and a draw of roughly $61,408 from the highway unassigned balance to clear the shortfall.
The alternative would create a separate line on the property tax bill and, by S5's estimate, could require raising roughly $105,000, producing an example municipal rate increase to approximately 1.022 (about a 30% rise relative to the presented baseline). S5 cautioned the board that while the deficit‑claim approach restored reserves in one year, it would have a sizable near‑term tax impact.
Board members emphasized the need for careful multi‑year planning and to avoid simply trimming recurring maintenance or staffing lines in ways that create larger long‑term costs. The board asked staff to prepare follow‑up figures and recommended additional budget review before the next meeting, when members plan to refine assumptions and tax‑rate decisions.
The board agreed to continue work on the tax‑rate calculation and to schedule a follow‑up session before setting the final FY27 rate.
