Blackstone Town Meeting Government Updates

Your Money, Your Town: Understanding the Key Discussions at Blackstone’s FinCom Meeting

May 16, 2025

0 732 7 minutes read

FinCom Deliberates on Town Spending – Are Blackstone’s Priorities in Line with Yours?

Blackstone neighbors, the winds of financial decisions are blowing through our town as the Finance Committee (FinCom) recently convened on May 15th to dissect the articles for the upcoming Special and Annual Town Meetings. In a year where household budgets are stretched thin, the discussions within FinCom, particularly around spending and significant salary increases, are raising eyebrows and demanding our attention. This isn’t just about line items; it’s about the future of Blackstone and how our hard-earned tax dollars are being allocated.

First Things First: Unanimous Agreement on Some Items

The FinCom reached a consensus and unanimously recommended all the Special Town Meeting articles. This indicates a shared understanding of these immediate needs for our town.

Annual Town Meeting Articles: Where the Debates Began

The Annual Town Meeting warrant ignited more passionate discussions, revealing differing perspectives on spending priorities and fiscal responsibility. Let’s examine some key articles:

Article 3 – Compensating Town Boards and Committees: There was a question about the clarity of the language regarding which boards’ compensation might be affected by budgetary decisions. While the Town Accountant clarified the need for appropriations, it was noted that the Town Charter dictates how some boards, like FinCom and Parks & Rec, are not compensated. This raises a point about ensuring our town documents are as clear as possible for everyone.

Article 8 – Funding Public Access Television: A FinCom member’s thoughtful question about what happens if a specific fund collects more than $150,000 was addressed. The Town Accountant explained that any excess funds remain within that specific fund and cannot be spent without a vote at a future Town Meeting. This process helps ensure fiscal accountability.

Article 10 – Bridge Design Services: The proposal for $300,000 for the design of the St. Paul Street bridge repairs received unanimous support from both the Capital Outlay committee and the FinCom. This is an important step towards maintaining our town’s infrastructure. Residents may want to learn more about the detailed design plans as they become available or what the entire project can possibly cost.

Article 13 – Dam and Levee Maintenance: This article, deemed important to prevent future problems, received unanimous recommendation. Investing in preventative maintenance is often a sound long-term financial strategy. Understanding the specifics of this maintenance will be helpful for voters.

Article 16 – Water Meter Replacement: The proposal for automated water meter reading, with anticipated savings in labor and improved billing accuracy, received unanimous support. This $1.5 million investment could lead to greater efficiency. Residents might consider the long-term implications for our town’s water management system.

Article 17 – Update Stormwater and Land Disturbance Bylaws: The FinCom’s unanimous approval of complex zoning bylaw changes, coupled with their call for the Planning Board to explain it at Town Meeting due to their own lack of full understanding, is concerning. It raises a question about the process: ideally, wouldn’t the Finance Committee have a comprehensive understanding of the implications of complex changes before making a recommendation? This prompts us to consider the depth of review applied to all warrant articles.

Article 25: Roosevelt Park Lighting – A Point of Contention: This article became a major point of contention, ultimately not recommended by FinCom. Concerns revolved around the project’s scope, the lack of a comprehensive long-term park development plan to guide the electrical needs, and the justification for the $200,000 price tag, even with recent attention to immediate electrical safety issues. The debate highlighted a tension between the BOS’s desire for progress on park improvements and FinCom’s emphasis on phased planning and fiscal prudence, particularly given broader capital needs facing the town. While Parks and Recreation supports the article and electrical professionals have assessed the site, FinCom’s strong opposition raises a key question: Why the significant divergence in opinion on this project, especially when compared to other articles that received unanimous support with seemingly less detailed background, and with available free cash? What fundamental principles of fiscal responsibility are guiding this particular opposition?

Article 29 – Fund Playground at Hartnett Middle School: The proposed playground at the middle school prompted discussion about its necessity and relevance for older students, given the existing parks catering to younger children. A parent spoke up and shared concerns about the unsafe condition of the current playground at the school, highlighting the need for a safe play area for middle school students. While the FinCom Chair expressed reservations about the timing of the design relative to potential school district grade alignment changes, the article ultimately passed (vote count unclear). What factors ultimately led to the approval of this article, and how will the town ensure the playground design meets the specific needs of the middle school population?

Article 34: BVT Stabilization Account – A Red Flag: The unanimous opposition to this article by FinCom, driven by concerns over the potential for the district to increase the allowed percentage without town approval, is a significant warning. Are we willing to cede more financial control to a regional entity without a clear guarantee of transparency and local input? The differing votes in neighboring towns underscore the complexity and potential risks of this proposal.

The Elephant in the Room: Skyrocketing Salaries

The largest item, the Town Budget, also saw significant discussion:

Staffing Levels and Compensation: Proposals for increased salaries for key administrative roles, such as the Executive Assistant to the Town Administrator and the Assistant Town Accountant, were discussed at length. The rationale often cited was the need to attract and retain qualified personnel in a competitive job market, with comparisons made to compensation in similar communities. These proposals passed with varying levels of support within the FinCom. These discussions highlight the ongoing challenge of balancing competitive compensation with responsible fiscal management.
Elected Officials’ Compensation: There were notable differences between the originally requested and recommended salary levels for elected officials like the Collector-Treasurer and Town Clerk. The arguments centered on the importance of attracting qualified individuals to these critical roles and ensuring their compensation aligns with the responsibilities and comparisons to other towns. These proposals also passed, but with split votes in the FinCom. These discussions invite us to consider the appropriate compensation for our elected leaders and how that impacts our town’s ability to attract dedicated individuals.

In an economy where many residents are facing financial strain, the suggestion of department proposal salaries reaching as high as a 27% increase compared to last year’s approved budget can be jarring. It’s important to note that roles and responsibilities vary, and not all elected/appointed positions are compensated through salaries or stipends. This table reflects some of those that are:

Note: This table reflects a selection of elected and appointed positions for reference only.

Below are some of the substantial increases being considered for individuals entrusted with key roles in our town.

Collector-Treasurer: The department’s request for a 24.40% increase, with FinCom ultimately recommending a 24% hike to $85,000, raises serious questions about affordability and justification in the current economic climate.
Town Clerk: A proposed 23.31% increase, with FinCom recommending a 23% rise to $82,500, similarly demands careful consideration by voters.
Board of Health: Significant percentage increases are also proposed for members of the Board of Health although this was not discussed during the latest FinCom meeting. It was discussed during previous FinCom meetings that the increase may look high (at 27%) but this only adds in a few hours a week – no additional discussion can be found on this.

The FinCom’s discussions revealed the tension between the desire to attract and retain qualified individuals and the need for fiscal prudence. Concerns were raised about the sustainability of such increases for a town with a limited commercial tax base, ultimately relying on homeowners. Are these proposed salary levels truly in line with the economic realities faced by Blackstone residents? What are the long-term implications of such significant year-over-year increases?

Watch the Finance Committee Meeting

FY 2026 Budget Proposal

Blackstone, It’s Time to Talk – and Vote!

The Finance Committee’s deliberations have illuminated critical questions about our town’s spending priorities, transparency in decision-making, and the long-term sustainability of the proposed budget as a whole. From infrastructure projects and park improvements to the compensation of our elected and appointed officials, the choices before us at Town Meeting will significantly shape Blackstone’s future. With available free cash and other dedicated funds, the fundamental question remains: are these resources being allocated in a way that truly reflects the diverse needs and financial realities of all Blackstone residents?

The significant financial decisions on the warrant, including the proposed $34,628,922 total town budget for FY 2026, demand your attention. This isn’t just about numbers on a page; it’s about the kind of community we are building and the legacy we are leaving for future generations in Blackstone.

Remember, at the 2024 Annual Town Meeting, only 126 residents voted “yes” to approve Blackstone’s entire $33.29 million operating budget. Out of 7,597 registered voters last year, that’s just 1.65% deciding the future of our town. Don’t let such a small fraction determine the fate of our $34.6 million budget this year!

Your voice is the most powerful tool in shaping that future. Don’t let the decision-making fall to a small fraction of our community. Attend the upcoming Annual Town Meeting. Ask the tough questions about all the articles on the warrant, including budget allocations and specific project proposals. Demand clear justifications for every expenditure. And most importantly, VOTE.

This is your town, your money, and your future. Make your voice heard.

🔧 Editor’s Note

The moments captured here reflect key public discussions during the Finance Committee’s May 15 meeting. But budget planning doesn’t happen overnight — many of these items have been in development through years of departmental work, previous meetings, and ongoing reviews.

Still, Town Meeting is where residents have the final say. If something still feels unclear or concerning, this is your chance to listen, speak up, or cast a vote.

When to Vote: May 27, 2025, Tuesday

Special Town Meeting at 7:00 PM

Annual Town Meeting at 7:30 PM

Also in this series:

This summary is based on our review of Finance Committee Meeting on March 15, 2025 and the FY 2026 Proposed Budget. We’ve worked hard to provide accurate information, so if you spot any mistakes, please let us know, and we’ll fix them. We encourage you to share your comments and questions below.