FY15 Capital Priorities Presented to Selectmen

By Meredith McCulloch

Capital Expenditures - Old Town SealOn January 6, Capital Expenditure Committee chair Mary Ellen Carter presented to the Selectmen the committee’s recommendations for FY2015 capital projects, meeting the Finance Committee budget guideline of $1.5 million dollars.

The list of 32 projects includes requests from all Town departments, prioritized by the Capital Expenditures Committee, which drew the line for recommendations to meet the funds available within the guideline. The projects ranged from space modifications at Lane and Davis schools to a mechanical study at the library. Sixteen of the items are Facility Department requests for improvements to school and town buildings and equipment. $160,000 is planned for expansion of the school wireless network. Water and sewer projects, which are paid through water and sewer rates, were excluded from the total, as was road repair, which is also budgeted separately. In addition, the committee recommended that $444,522 for DPW vehicle and equipment replacement be bonded, and that several projects may potentially be funded through grants or Community Preservation Funds—formal requests for those projects will be prepared for possible action at the Community Preservation Committee’s January meeting.

When Selectman Rosenberg asked how the committee rankings compare to those generated by VFA software, a capital planning and management tool that was purchased about two years ago, Carter responded that a software problem prevented printing out the list.

Rosenberg said, “This is disconcerting. So we have no idea. . . . It would be helpful to see if there is a big discrepancy. Last year was a trial run and now we cannot even see the rankings.” Carter responded that hopefully the problem will be fixed shortly, but for now the list can be read on the computer screen.

Get The Bedford Citizen in your inbox!



Bill Moonan, the Selectmen’s liaison to the Capital Expenditures Committee, said the requests reflect a better understanding of rankings on the part of the Town Department. He went on to say, “It was our considered opinion that we did not want to know what the computer thought until we saw how we did in relation to the machine. [We] deliberately did not want to know what the computer thought first, but asked for the conclusions of departments.  “

Rosenberg asked, “So how does the software fit into the process?”

Carter replied, “It provides many levels of detail, so the committee has a better understanding of the project. It provides the ability to run reports and to be more forward looking.” (Materials distributed at the meeting showed a six-year projection of costs.)

Town manager Rick Reed added, ‘The system shows what we should be doing.”

Rosenberg observed, “At the very bottom of the list, beyond anyone’s vision is the press box renewal for $113,300. The way the system works, [this item] will never rise to the top. It will never be funded under this process. How can we replace something like that?”

Moonan said one question that came up was whether the design had been fully explored to include all possible solutions for access. He added, “Sometimes a project like this needs a champion who will explore options and funding possibilities.”

Carter said, “The committee has to figure out how to make [the] best use of funds available within the budget. If you sum it all up, it is nine million dollars. We are certainly not going to get nine million for capital.”

Reed said there are a couple of ways to get more funding for capital. The capital bond expenses will be going down in the future and there may be an opening for a debt exclusion, or the town could use more of the available tax levy.

The Selectmen have not yet voted to recommend the list as presented, but you can read the complete list by clicking this link. The columns of the table are as follows:

  • The # column of the table on the left is a random number assigned to each project as it came in.
  • The Group Score is a compilation of the committee’s scoring.
  • The Group Rank is the priority given to the project overall.
  • The 2015 column shows the estimated cost of the project.
  • The Running Total is the total costs of the projects up to that line.
  • The shaded lines are items that may qualify at least in part for alternate funding, such as grants or CPC funds.
Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Subscribe
Notify of

0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

All Stories

What’s Bedford Thinking about the Red Sox?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Junior Landscaping
Go toTop