Funding discussed at Hadley Special Town Meeting

Nov. 1, 2022 | Rory Liddy
rliddy@thereminder.com

The meeting was moderated by Kirk Whatley (pictured), with an attendance of 113 voters.
Photo credit: Hadley Media.

HADLEY – Hadley residents and local politicians gathered in Hopkins Academy for a Special Town Meeting the night of Oct. 27. Ten items were voted on, and two items listed on the warrant prior to the meeting were bypassed, and postponed to a later date. At last count before the meeting started, 113 residents were in attendance, considered a quorum.

Article 1 was an amendment to several lines within the fiscal year 2023 (FY23) General Fund Budget by way of amending the vote on Article 7 of the last Annual Town Meeting, which took place on May 5. It increases the General Fund Budget by $219,528, to a total of $19,641,131. This increases various public department salaries and insurance funds. The vote passed unanimously.

Article 2 was also a budget increase by way of amending an article from the Annual Town Meeting, this time for the sewer, water and Hadley Media enterprise funds, amending the vote on Article 8 from May 5. It increases these funds by $39,622 to a total of $2,522,319. The vote passed unanimously.

Article 3 cleaned up balances from prior capital repair projects. A total of $34,002.50 was transferred from these project balances to the Capital Stabilization Fund. The article also redirects $2,764.99 to replace tiles in school ceilings. The vote passed unanimously.

Article 4 was a vote to raise, transfer or borrow funds from other reserves to fund a variety of capital projects, totaling $1,860,364. Most of these projects were equipment replacements for the DPW, as well as body cameras for police officers, school repairs and Hadley Media equipment. This article inspired a considerable amount of public comment; many residents felt as though there were too many items within the article bundled as one. However, the vote still passed by majority.

Article 5 concerned payment of invoices received by the town during FY23 totaling $17,661.67. The vote passed unanimously.

Article 6 extended the deadlines for two projects by one more year. These were the Library Window and Bracket fund, and the Hockanum Cemetery Fence project. Both are funded by the Community Preservation Act (CPA). The vote passed unanimously.

Article 7 transferred unused funds from previous CPA projects back into the town’s CPA reserves. CPA funds are broken into various designations. In this instance, $8,000 was transferred back into CPA Historic, $25,000 into CPA Housing, $15,810 into CPA General and $285.33 was put back into CPA Open Space. The vote passed unanimously.

Article 8 concerned the Hockanum Cemetery Fence project, to not only replace the fence but also “reinforce the turf where cars park and create a pillar to memorialize the previous stone wall completed by the WPA.” The article transfers $22,760 from CPA Historic and $2,240 from CPA General to the Hockanum Cemetery Committee. The vote passed almost unanimously, with only two opposing votes.

Article 9 transferred money from the town to Hadley Public Schools to complete Phase II of the Hopkins Academy athletic fields, which are currently undergoing rehabilitation and development. The town will transfer $90,965 from CPA Open Space, $705,735 from CPA General and $750,000 funded through borrowing to HPS, totaling $1,546,700. The vote passed almost unanimously, with only one opposing vote.

Articles 10 and 11 were bypassed.

Article 12 was a non-binding referendum regarding a declaration of a climate change emergency by the town of Hadley. It acknowledged a severe climate crisis underway globally, and would have made a commitment for Hadley to join the state and global target of zero emissions by 2050. Many in attendance supported the declaration, but many did not; several residents voiced concerns that the declaration was merely a capitulation to the out-of-touch demands of politicians in Boston and Washington D.C., and that Hadley should not embrace the 2050 goal because of its unrealistic nature. The vote failed, with 72 residents for it and 83 against.

Share this: