Town’s future cost for employee health care

This is a report titled “Town of Medfield Other Post-Employment Benefits – Actuarial Valuation – 1/1/2011.”  The report projects the cost to the Town of Medfield of the future health care costs already earned by the town’s current employees and retirees.  Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) are employee benefits that have already been earned.  In our case these are obligations for which the town has not set aside any funds to pay those future costs.  This unfunded town liability on 1/1/2011 appears to have been estimated by the consultant in this report to stand at $39,775, 805.

https://medfield02052.blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/20110101-actuarialvaluation-opeb.pdf

From the report –

Summary of Actuarial Results
The actuarial values in this report were calculated consistent with the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 45, Accounting and Financial Reporting by Employers for Postemployment Benefits Other Than Pensions, issued June 2004. Values at two discount rates are presented. The 7.50% discount rate represents the expected rate .of return for a funded plan with a longer-term investment horizon. For an unfunded plan, the GASB Statement No. 45 calls for the use of a discount rate approximating the rate of return of Medfield’s general assets. The rate we recommend for Medfield is 4.25%. The OPEB liability is extremely sensitive to this assumption. Use of the unfunded rate instead of the funded rate causes the Annual Required Contribution (ARC), Accrued Actuarial Liability (AAL), and the Normal Cost to increase dramatically.

The summary results are as follows:
• Actuarial Accrued Liability (” AAL”) is the “price” attrbutable to benefits earned in past years. The total AAL as of January I, 2011 (at 4.25%% discount rate) is $39,775,805.  This is made up of approximately $22.3 million for current active Medfield employees and approximately $17.5 million for Medfield retirees, spouses and survivors.
• The Normal Cost is the “price” attributable to benefits earned in the current year. The Normal Cost as of January 1, 2011 (at the 4.25% discount rate) is approximately $1.9 million.
• Based on a twenty-eight year funding schedule (at the 4.25% discount rate), the Fiscal 2011 contribution would be $3,503,030. This figure is referred to as the Annual Required Contdbution (ARC). This figure should be contrasted with the ARC using the fully funded 7.50% rate and a thirty-year funding schedule of $2,432,940. These compare to the pay-as-you-go contribution of the existing costs for current retirees of $1,234,867. For an illustration of how payment of the ARC impacts the funding of the plan over time, please refer to the “mustrative Funding Schedule” discussion beginning on page 15 and the accompanying table on page 35. The following table shows the breakdown of the Actuarial Accrued Liability between future retirees and current retirees, as well as the normal cost, at Medfield’s different discount rates:

[SEE THE REPORT FOR THE CHART (it did not copy well below)]

Actuarial Results as of ,January 1, 2011 7.50% Rate 4.25% Rate

Current Actives                                                       $12,922,731   $22,309,068

Current Retirees, Beneficiaries, Vesteds ~  $12,881,239 ;  $17,466,737
and Survivors

Total AAL .                                                                  $2~,803,970   $39,775,805

Normal Cost                                                                $979,396            $1,889,948

ARC (uses 28 year amortization for

Unfunded, 30 years for Funded) .                       $2,432,940      $3,503,030

Dover still studying Bay Colony Rail Trail

The following was issued today by the Dover Rail Trail Committee –

=======================================

To the residents of Dover:

At the May 7 Town Meeting, Article 11 will request $5000 to continue the study of converting Dover’s rail bed into a rail trail. The presentation to be given at Town Meeting is an enhanced version of the one presented at the Warrant Committee’s Open Hearing on March 19 , which has been  on the Town website since then (scroll down the home page and then scroll through the Open Hearing presentations). The Dover Rail Trail Committee would like to provide some background information to you prior to Town Meeting.

Activity regarding the rail trail began 2 years ago.  In November 2009 there was a presentation to the Dover Board of Selectmen and abutters (over 80 had been notified by mail of the meeting) by the Bay Colony Rail Trail Association (BCRT), a non-profit formed to explore a rail trail in Medfield, Dover and Needham. Other than requesting that the Boston Metropolitan Planning Organization  do a no-charge feasibility study there was no official action by Dover until June 2011, when  the BOS created the Dover Rail Trail Committee (RTC) with the charge to “develop a recommendation for the conversion of the Bay Colony rail bed into a recreational trail by working with all relevant boards, committees and departments in Dover…The final product should be a thorough report presenting a balanced discussion of the pros/cons of the conversion and suggested policies for all issues that must be addressed.”

In the Spring of 2011, the Planning Board released the results of the Master Plan Survey that had been distributed to all Dover residents during the winter. 681 citizens of Dover responded to the rail trail question:  Would you favor converting the unused rail line passing through Needham, Dover, and Medfield into a “rail trail” for walking and biking across the three towns? 

No                                                                                          159         24%

Yes, if private property can be protected             263         40%

Yes, if funded privately and/or by grant                                240         36%

Blank                                                                                       19

In addition, the BCRT sponsored a booth at the past two Dover Days Fairs and has accumulated a list of almost 100 Dover residents interested in a rail trail. Clearly, there was interest by Dover’s citizens to explore a rail trail and the BOS responded by creating this committee.

Since June 2011, the activities of the RTC have been discussed at 17 Selectmen’s meetings, including numerous pleas for volunteers (pro, con and neutral) to join the committee, a message that was also on the Dover website for months; two articles appeared in Globe West; and discussions were held with the Conservation Commission and Open Space Committee. Minutes have been posted promptly on the Dover website. And, finally, for those interested in learning more, the RTC committee members have been available to speak to anyone interested in our progress.

The RTC requested that the Selectmen put this article on the Warrant in order to obtain a small amount of funds in case we need them as we conduct the study. We are NOT asking for a vote to build a rail trail. This warrant article only asks for funds to study the issue so Dover’s citizens can be presented at the May 2013 Town Meeting (the current target date) with a complete study that addresses all the questions raised by Dover’s residents, boards and committees. It will be fact-based and comprehensive.

The RTC does have a few working assumptions that have been publically discussed:  the trail will NOT be paved, will fit into the rural character of Dover, and will cost the citizens of Dover very little money.  Donations, grants, volunteer support and other non-profit opportunities are anticipated to cover the vast majority of the cost. Development of a detailed financial plan will, of course, be part of the study.

Although there are already  60 questions on our list to study, the committee will be reaching out to everyone in Dover for input. The more questions the better. The questions will be researched, looked at from a Dover-centric perspective, and information will be obtained from the many communities in Massachusetts that have dealt with these issues so we can learn from those who have already completed the process of making a decision about a local rail trail in  their community.

This is a complex issue. The study should be done because over 700 citizens, through the survey and BCRT, have expressed their opposition, support or desire to truly understand the project before voting on its possible implementation. We urge you to support our efforts to provide you with a complete and thoughtful study and recommendation.

Thank you.

 

The Dover Rail Trail Committee

April 27, 2012

Proposed zoning changes at 4/30/12 Town Meeting

There is an Annual Town Meeting warrant article that proposes changes to the use table under the Town of Medfield’s Zoning Bylaw.  The zoning bylaw use regulations in section 5 of the Town of Medfield’s Zoning Bylaw are proposed to change as per the additions (in green), deletions (in gray), and changes (in yellow) noted in the attached material.

https://medfield02052.blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/20120427-atm-proposed-zoning-changes.doc

MMA Alert this afternoon on budget passed by House

HOUSE PASSES $32.4B BUDGET

KEY LOCAL AID ACCOUNTS GAIN MILLIONS

PLEASE CALL YOUR SENATORS TODAY TO ENSURE THAT LOCAL AID IS A TOP PRIORITY IN SENATE BUDGET

As the clock neared midnight on Wednesday, April 25, the House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to pass its version of the fiscal 2013 state budget, increasing key local aid accounts by $105 million compared to the budget submitted by the Governor in January.   The Senate Ways and Means Committee is expected to release its own budget proposal in mid-May, and full Senate debate will begin on May 21.

The House budget would increase municipal and school aid by $105 million above the amount proposed by the Governor in January (H. 2).  The House Ways and Means proposal guarantees funding for unrestricted municipal aid at $899 million, adding $65 million to the base Cherry Sheet distribution; adds $18.5 million to Chapter 70 to guarantee $40 per student minimum aid for all cities, towns and school districts; increases the SPED Circuit Breaker by $8.4 million; fully funds homeless student transportation at $11.3 million; and increases regional school transportation by $2 million.  This is great news and a clear sign of the strong commitment of the members of the House to local government.

The Division of Local Services (DLS) has released updated preliminary Cherry Sheets for fiscal 2013 showing aid amounts for individual cities, towns and school districts based on the House budget committee bill.  Local officials can view their preliminary House Cherry Sheets at http://www.mass.gov/dor/local-officials/municipal-data-and-financial-management/cherry-sheets/2013-cherry-sheets/

During the three days of debate in the House, members several passed pro-municipal amendments.  Two stand out.  The first is a comprehensive plan to update and fund the Community Preservation Act (CPA) filed by HW&M Vice-Chair Stephen Kulik and House Minority Leader Bradley Jones.  The CPA amendment would allow cities and towns to use funds to repair and upgrade existing recreation areas, expands the qualifying sources of local fund that can be used for a state match, and increases funding for the state share of the CPA with an annual transfer of $25 million from any end-of-year state budget surplus into the CPA Statewide Trust Fund rather than an increase in the registry of deeds recording fees.  The second amendment would increase funding for the Shannon Anti-Gang program from $2 million to $5.5 million.

In addition, the House members rejected several amendments opposed by the MMA, including amendments that would have diverted local aid to fund the state share of the police career incentive pay program, and another amendment that would have expanded collective bargaining by overriding existing management rights regarding the appointment, promotion, transfer and removal of employees.

The House-passed budget represents real progress for cities and towns, and it is imperative that the Senators embrace these investments in their version of the budget as well.  Vital local aid decisions will be made in the Senate over the next several days, and we are asking local officials to contact their Senators today to make sure that local aid receives the highest priority.

PLEASE CALL YOUR SENATORS AND ASK THEM TO SUPPORT THE LOCAL AID LEVELS PASSED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

HERE ARE THE KEY POINTS TO EMPHASIZE:

$65 MILLION FOR DIRECT MUNICIPAL AID: The House budget funds the Unrestricted General Government Aid account at $899 million, increasing the base appropriation on the Cherry Sheet by $65 million.  The Governor proposed level-funding UGGA at $834 million, and tentatively providing a later supplemental distribution of $65 million in October if the state ends fiscal 2012 with a surplus.  But with fiscal 2012 state revenues coming in below expectations, the $65 million is not guaranteed under the Governor’s plan, and communities wouldn’t have any idea how much aid, if any, would result in October, making it impossible to include the funds in fiscal 2013 operating budgets.  The House budget would solve this problem by making the $65 million permanent and adding it to the base so that cities and towns can make full use of the funds for ongoing operations and essential services in their fiscal 2013 budgets.

After a municipal aid reduction of nearly $500 million since fiscal 2009, this increase is vitally needed to allow cities and towns to maintain municipal services and avoid higher reliance on the property tax.  It is also important to note that the Committee’s recommendation recognizes the projected increase in state Lottery revenues for fiscal 2012 and 2013, and makes sure that cities and towns receive their Lottery dollars as intended in state law.

MINIMUM AID FOR CHAPTER 70: The House added $18.5 million to Chapter 70 school aid to ensure that all municipalities and districts receive an increase of at least $40 per student next year – under the Governor’s budget only one-third of communities and school districts received any increase, and this plan ensures that every district would receive a boost

SPED CIRCUIT BREAKER: The House added $8.4 million to the special education “circuit beaker” account to get closer to full funding.  Under the Governor’s budget, the state would reimburse only 62% of eligible costs instead of the 75% in the law.  The $8.4 million would increase the reimbursement rate to 68%.

FUNDING THE TRANSPORTATION OF HOMELESS STUDENTS: The House budget fully funds the $11.3 million mandate for homeless student transportation costs triggered by state acceptance of the federal McKinney-Vento Act.  Without this new line-item the state would fail to end this new unfunded mandate.

SUPPORT THE CPA AMENDMENT: The House plan would increase CPA funding by $25 million, and allow cities and towns to leverage their own resources to improve existing recreation areas, purchase open space, protect historic assets, and expand affordable housing.  The amendment reflects popular legislation that a majority of the Senate has co-sponsored in separate legislation.

No mosquito spraying this year, for now

Notice from Norfolk County Mosquito Control says it is too dry to make aerial larvacide spraying logical –

The State Reclamation and Mosquito Control Board
NORFOLK COUNTY MOSQUITO CONTROL DISTRICT
61 Endicott Street, Building #34, Norwood, MA 02062
(781) 762-3681 fax: (781) 769-6436
http://www.norfolkcountymosquito.org
DAVID A. LAWSON
Acting Director

To: Boards of Health
From: David A. Lawson, Acting Director
Date: April 3, 2012

RE: Aerial Application 2012

The Norfolk County Mosquito Control District has utilized aerial larvicide as a strategic tool in helping to control mosquitoes for many decades. Specifically, we have consistently conducted a county-wide aerial larvicide for the last 11 years. This year, we have been presented with a unique situation.  Southeastern Massachusetts has experienced the driest first 3 months since records have been kept.  This situation has caused many of the wetlands of our district to dry up completely and some to have very low water levels.

We have conducted larval mosquito surveys and have concluded that it would be irresponsible for us to conduct an aerial larvicide at this point. We believe that the natural conditions alone will control more mosquitoes than we could hope to in a ‘normal’ year, and to expend the funds we normally use for this application would not be the best use of the funds the towns contribute for the operation of the District.

We will continue to monitor the environment and if any significant rains arrive we may have to respond with aerial larvicide at a later date. If significant rains do not arrive in the next few weeks, we may have one of the lightest mosquito emergences in a long time. Due to some very warm early weather in March, the mosquito larvae that are present are more advanced than in most years. With some warm weather, we may see adult mosquitoes out earlier than normal possibly in late April or early May, when we normally see them in mid to late May.

In the meantime, we are currently hand larviciding smaller sites. Be reminded that our truck mounted ULV spray program is temperature dependent and will likely still begin around Memorial Day as night-time temperatures are high enough. If you have any questions, please do contact us.

Town seeks experts to evaluate its purchase of MSH

The town is seeking residents with real estate development expertise, who are willing to assist the town in the process of evaluating whether the Town of Medfield should purchase the former Medfield State Hospital site from the state.  Within the past month DCAM made known that it is willing to sell the site to the town, on terms yet to be worked out.  Therefore, the town now needs to determine whether it is in the best interest of the town to purchase that site.

To evaluate the possible purchase of the former Medfield State Hospital site, the Board of Selectmen are seeking to recruit residents with real estate development experience to advise the town.  If you have skills that can assist the town in this process and if you are willing to volunteer some time, you can let me, Mike Sullivan and/or Kristine Trieweiller know of your interest.

DCAM is proceeding with the feasibility study of uses for the former Medfield State Hospital sits that it commissioned from Jones, Lang, LaSalle.  We are told that feasibility study should be finished in 60-90 days.

Annual Town Meeting warrant articles and motions

Mike Sullivan today circulated the attached list of the Annual Town Meeting warrant articles and the supporting motions for each, which contains greater details.   https://medfield02052.blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/20120409-sm-2012atm-motions.doc

Take the Medfield Open Space and Recreation Survey

FROM PATCH –

The Medfield Open Space and Recreation Plan Committee is updating the 2002 Open Space and Recreation Plan.

The plan assists town government by assessing needs and setting priorities as expressed by residents. Additionally, a current Open Space and Recreation Plan qualifies the town for open space grants that help fund the acquisition of open space and the protection of important town resources.

In order to complete its plan update, the committee needs your help in completing its survey by accessing this link: www.surveymonkey.com/s/VHX2MQF.

The survey addresses the open space needs of the town and need for active recreational facilities. Any questions should be directed to Leslee Willitts, Conservation Agent, at (508) 906-3028 or lwillitts@medfield.net.

MSH – discussions with state today

My email exchange today with DCAM about the Medfield State Hospital site –

======================================

Sandra,
I am glad to learn that I am not the only one working today.  Please call me Pete.  Also, I am no longer the chair of the Board of Selectmen.  Ann Thompson was elected chair at our meeting last Tuesday evening – we have a nice system of taking turns.
Mediation –
Yes, the Board of Selectmen did agree a week ago today at our 4:30 PM meeting to accept Commissioner Cornelison’s generous offer to mediate the Medfield State Hospital clean up, and at that time we appointed the crew I listed to do so for the town.  We also like the suggested mediator, so thank you too for a great selection.  I apologize if the information of our interest in mediation has not yet reached DCAM, as I know you are trying to adhere to a tight schedule to get the clean up accomplished this year.  The town is holding our annual town meeting on 4/30, so we are fully engaged with making that process happen, perhaps to the detriment of other tasks.
Medfield State Hospital Purchase –
Finally, please know also, that at the Board of Selectmen meeting one week ago the selectmen also decided to proceed to investigate the possible purchase of the Medfield State Hospital site by the Town of Medfield, and to that end look forward as a first step to getting the materials that the Commissioner mentioned when we met at her office about how that process has occurred with other towns. 
Second, we also look forward to the feasibility study DCAM has commissioned, and renew our requests that (1) it be released in a draft form the town first, so that the town can make suggestions, before the study gets released in final form, and (2) that we would welcome any other opportunities to take part in the study.  While we do not know how to do such a study, we do know our town well.
Third, we are trying to mobilize the expertise needed to responsibly react to and deal with the possible purchase of the Medfield State Hospital site from the state.
Fourth, while not DCAM’s issue directly and not yet the Board of Selectmen’s position, I have suggested that the town make use of the services of someone like Lawrence Susskind to come to a town wide agreement about the Medfield State Hospital site – where the town will have a complicated factual and political process through which to go, if it purchases the site.  I heard Professor Lawrence Susskind speak to the Massachusetts Municipal Association’s Leadership Conference last June, and was impressed by his use of his system to get complex entities to agree on resolutions to complex problems.  “Breaking Robert’s Rules” is his book on how to conduct such a process.  What follows was the blurb about Lawrence Susskind from the MMA’s program –
Lawrence Susskind, a renowned public dispute mediator, is the Ford Professor of Urban and Environmental Planning at MIT and Director of the Public Disputes Program at Harvard Law School. He is the author of more than 15 books, including “Breaking Robert’s Rules” (2006).
My thanks all at DCAM – I am personally enthused both by the offer to sell the site to the town and that we seem to be renewing the collaborative approach to solving the issues we share surrounding the Medfield State Hospital.
Best,
Pete
Osler L. Peterson, Attorney at Law
PETERSON | Law
580 Washington Street, Newton, MA 02458
66 North St, PO Box 358, Medfield, MA 02052
T 617.969.1500
T 617.969.1501 (direct)
M 508-359-9190
F 617.663.6008
osler.peterson@verizon.net
—– Original Message —–

From: “Duran, Sandra (DCP)”
To: “Olson Peterson (osler.peterson@verizon.net)”
Sent: 4/06/2012 11:33AM
Subject: FW: Friday Special Medfield Selectman’s meeting
Mr. Chairman:

Commissioner Cornelison asked me to reach out to you regarding her offer to engage in mediation.  We saw your blog of April 3rd and want to confirm with you the Town’s interest in mediating and the list of participants.

Would you mind responding to this email to clarify/confirm the above?  We would like to schedule the mediation sessions as soon as possible.

Thank you,

Sandra

Sandra R. Duran

Director of Building Maintenance and Operations

Enhanced by Zemanta

Should Medfield reconsider a meals tax

The state Dept. Of Revenue’s Cities and Towns email today focuses on the meals tax.  Medfield’s annual town meeting (ATM) voted not to impose the 0.75% local option meals tax a couple of years ago.  I wonder if it is not time to ask the voters once again whether they want to impose the meals tax.  I support the local option tax because:

  • to me, meals at restaurants are more a luxury than a necessity
  • Medfield restaurants draw from out of town, so we would get revenue from non-residents
  • getting those meals tax monies would lower our property taxes
  • we pay that meals tax when we go to restaurants in the 151 cities and town outside of Medfield that have the tax

This was the emailed material from the DOR –

Cities and Towns Have Collected Nearly $500 million in Local Option Meal and Room Taxes Since FY10

Since the local option meals tax took effect in FY10, 151 communities have approved levying the .75 percent local option meals tax in addition to the state’s 6.25 percent meals tax, which has generated more than $150 million in local option revenue for those cities and towns. .  .
And during that same time period, the local option room tax has generated $332.7 million, with 96 communities now choosing to levy a six percent local option.
Those two revenue sources have generated more than $482 million in revenue available for appropriation in cities and towns.
The meals tax has grown each year, from $27.1 million in FY10 to $60.7 million in FY11, and, with the final June distribution yet to come, to $62.3 million in FY12.
The room tax has followed a similar course, growing from $94.5 million in FY10 to $126.0 million in FY11 to $111.6 million in FY12, with the final distribution coming in June sure to push the total revenue ahead of FY11.
These local options are additional tools for the communities that choose to use them in tight fiscal times, and cities and towns have used them to maintain services levels and bridge financial gaps.

Robert G. Nunes
Deputy Commissioner & Director of Municipal Affairs