Milton leaders are confronting a stark financial reality as new projections reveal a widening structural deficit that could require a local tax override of up to $14.5 million by 2029. During a Monday meeting of the Budget Coordination Committee, members grappled with expense growth that continues to outpace revenue, sparking a debate over school spending trends and the accuracy of local tax data. Warrant Committee member Jay Meschino presented a draft forecast showing town expenses growing at an annual rate of 4.7 percent while revenues trail at just 3 percent. To bridge this gap, the town has relied on the Operating Budget Stabilization Fund (OBSF), but Meschino warned that those reserves are a finite resource. If we want the OBSF to last through 2029, we would need an override in the spring of 2029 for FY30, Meschino said, noting that to fund services for another five-year cycle, the town would likely need to ask voters for between $13 million and $14.5 million.

The committee’s discussion highlighted a recurring tension between town and school spending trajectories. Town Administrator Nick Milano reported that while town departments have averaged a 4 percent growth trend over the last decade, school spending has hovered closer to 5.2 percent. Milano also shared a rare piece of positive news regarding the fiscal year 2027 outlook, noting that a House budget proposal could net Milton an additional $285,000 in state aid. The House budget that the Ways and Means Committee put out does have increased Chapter 70 funding across the board at a higher minimum aid, Milano explained, pointing out that per-student allocation could jump from $30 to $75. However, he cautioned that a looming trash and recycling contract renewal in 2027 remains an outsized downside risk for the town’s general expenses.

A committee member identified as Brian challenged the necessity of the 5 percent annual growth assumption for the school district, noting that student populations have remained relatively flat. Pre-COVID, it was in the 3 percent range. Our peer group was 4.2 percent, he noted, asking why the forecast wouldn't align closer to national salary averages of 2.5 to 3 percent. Superintendent Dr. Peter Burrows defended the projections, citing the complex realities of collective bargaining and the increasing costs of specialized student services. Unless every single person is at the top of the scale, your salary increase will be more than just the COLA because of steps and lanes, Dr. Burrows said. He added that while the total headcount is steady, the identification of students with special needs and ELL populations—which are more costly to serve—has increased.

Planning Board member Maggie Desmond raised concerns about public misconceptions regarding the town’s ability to generate revenue from local businesses. She clarified that the $4 million currently collected in personal property tax is almost entirely derived from utility infrastructure rather than small shops or restaurants. 96 percent of that $4 million is brought in from utilities—pipelines, cellular, telephone poles, and electricity infrastructure, Desmond said. Only about $150,000 is brought in from local businesses. If you want to bring in more from local businesses, that's a different conversation, but we should be accurate.

As the committee prepares to present these findings to the public, members emphasized the need for a unified message to avoid community confusion. Denny Swenson urged the group to reach a consensus on the data before it reaches constituents. If we don't present a correct and real forecast, it's only going to get us into more trouble with constituents, Swenson said. Amy Dexter echoed the need for clarity, stressing that the town must distinguish between sustainable revenue and temporary fixes. We need to make clear the difference between recurring revenue and one-time money, Dexter said. If we say we have $2.7 million but only $700,000 is recurring, we have the same problem that kept our bubble inflated before—funding recurring expenses with one-time money.

The difficulty of communicating these nuances to the average taxpayer was a major point of concern for Julia Fiske, who argued that the forecast should reflect a middle-of-the-road assumption rather than a worst-case scenario. Forecasting is nuanced and not everybody understands that, Fiske said. We need to be careful in the messaging so we can justify it and replicate it. Committee member Winston suggested that the final presentation to Town Meeting must be simplified to ensure the core message isn't lost in the data. There should be a simple, coherent message for the people who just want the bottom line, Winston remarked, warning that if you use too many charts, you're going to lose them.

Chair Roxanne Musto closed the session by noting that the committee would continue refining its budget process master schedule and a new committee survey in upcoming meetings. We have several follow-on items we've been working on, but we will continue the conversation we've started on our financial projections, Musto said, confirming the committee would reconvene the following Monday to finalize the presentation strategy.