Braintree’s Side
In Controversy

First of all, let me say that the current negotiations between Randolph and Braintree regarding the Fire Services contract in NO way reflects any dissatisfaction with the department, its members, or its services. It is likely one of the best fire departments in the state—if not the country—and we thank each and every volunteer for their dedicated service. The current negotiation is about the economics of what is fair for Braintree taxpayers to pay for these services.

I was disappointed in your coverage last week regarding the Braintree/Randolph Fire Services contract. It was very biased in its reporting of Randolph’s discussions only, with no comment from any Braintree representative, which may have given a much less slanted picture of the negotiations, hardly occasional, that have gone on regarding this issue.

Nowhere was it reported that the two boards met face-to-face on May 17 and had an in-depth and thoughtful discussion of the fire contract terms and a verbalization of the reasons why Braintree was requesting a lower Grand List assessment percentage than 100%—which for 2007 represents an assessment of $48,042. With the exception of the selectboard members, the citizens quoted in your article that were opposed to a compromise percentage were not at that meeting or involved in the current negotiations in any way.

At that meeting, we (the Braintree selectboard) made a compromise offer of 85% of our grand list, or an assessment of $40,836, which represents an amount at the very high end of what our research has indicated a town of Braintree’s size and population may be paying for fire services. Randolph’s Fire Department needs are much greater than Braintree’s and that drives the budgets up.

The idea that the taxpayers of Randolph are subsidizing Braintree taxpayers’ fire services with a lesser assessment percentage is ridiculous. Our selectboard has done much research on what other towns Braintree’s size are paying for fire services. The costs for services range from $18,000 to $40,000. It is that research that has prompted us to have talks with Randolph regarding the current assessment percentage.

A little history: In our research we discovered several different ways that towns can provide taxpayers with fire services:

1. We can have our own fire department. At this time we do not feel this is a viable option, although we estimate that this option would cost the Braintree taxpayers approximately $40,000 a year (this year’s dollars) – the same as an 85% assessment from Randolph.

2. We could pay for fire services on a per-call basis. This could result in large fluctuations year to year and would be difficult to budget. We could easily set up a Fire Services Fund and budget an amount annually to cover the costs (at $40,000 a year it is probable we would be well funded.) However, the Randolph selectboard is not interested in this method of providing services.

3. We could pay a percentage of our grand list determined to be fair and equitable based on our needs and usage. Because this is the method of choice for the Randolph selectboard, this is the method we are currently negotiating. It is important to point out that under this method of assessment Braintree has no ownership in any of the Randolph Fire departments and no official say in any decisions that are made regarding the operations, including equipment purchases and new construction – at any percentage. All we do is pay the bill.

It was back in 1989 that the two selectboards got together and came up with a plan for Braintree to pay Randolph for fire services. At that time an assessment percentage of 50% was put in place with a gradual increase up to 70% a few years later where the assessment percentage remained for 10 years. At the time they determined that 70% was a fair assessment percentage.

It was in 2000 that a different Randolph selectboard came back to the table with the contention that it was not the original intention that the assessment percentage stay at 70% but had been an oversight (for 10 years) and should have continued to increase to 100%. Looking back, we do not agree with that contention.

Selectman Larry Townsend’s suggestion at our May 17 meeting (not Jim’s as indicated in your article) of calculating an assessment based on 100% of Randolph Dept budget, 80% of the Randolph Center budget, and 80% of the East Randolph budget seems to represent a reasonable compromise – at 88% of Braintree’s grand list. This methodology has nothing to do with the actual functioning of the departments (as Mr. Floyd inferred in your article), only Braintree’s assessment.

The Braintree select board is hopeful that we will be able to agree on a reasonable fixed assessment percentage and sign a contract for a period of five years that will put this issue to bed for that time period. No contract lasts forever and all require renegotiation from time to time as circumstances change. There is no black and white answer to this issue. But we are hopeful that a weighing of the facts and all points of view will result in a solution that taxpayers of both towns can be comfortable with. This should not be a political or ego driven issue.

I hope this letter provides some of the information necessary for the taxpayers of both towns to appreciate the process and what we are trying to accomplish. An assessment that is fair to all.

George R. Gray

Braintree Selectboard