Second misunderstanding a problem?
By Caitlyn Kelleher JOURNAL REPORTER

The Ashburnham Board of Selectmen and the Ashburnham- Westminster Regional School Committee members are less than pleased with each other after the Selectmen and Advisory Board voted to cut $70,000 in proposed funding.

Members of both groups seem slight surprised by the reactions and actions of their counterparts after holding separate meetings at the same time without acknowledgement of the other groups agendas.

"We were so focused on the papers on our desk, we weren't focused on their desk. We are all human in that respect," Selectman Jonathan Dennehy said.

Everyone agrees that the statements being made Tuesday and early Wednesday are partly emotion from having worked hard and just having different reactions. School Committee Chairman David Christianson agrees that the budget now is what is proposed.

"You look at the problem and you find a way to solve and mitigate it," he said.

Selectmen say there were warning signs of the impending budget cut despite the fact that no specifics were mentioned.

Superintendent Michael Zapantis and other school committee members have a distinctly different memory of comments made by Selectmen about the likelihood the district would get a funding mechanism based on 2 ½ percent plus growth.

"I'm not saying I have never heard the topic brought up before. I am not denying that we met on March 3. All of these conversation need to put in the correct context," Zapantis said.

A meeting between Zapantis, Business Administrator Sherry Kersey, town Treasurer Jim Shanahan, Interim Town Administrator Paul Boushell seems to be at the heart of the matter.

"At the meeting I referenced on Monday, March 3, the concern that was raised at that meeting was the towns might not receive their full lottery aid that they had received in 2008," Zapantis said. "The whole issue of even talking about and thinking about lowering 2 ½ plus growth was based on that."

Zapantis said he thought the issue was resolved then the town received additional lottery aid.

Dennehy, on the other hand said, "The only subject to this meeting was to go through how the 2 ½ growth number was created."

He added there was also a discussion on troubles in the town budget.

The Committee members feel like they should have been called in to the Selectmen's meeting on Tuesday to hear the discussion.

"We felt under the gun to get our business done," Dennehy said. "Was there a mistake in courtesy? Maybe."

But Dennhey said he thought there was a "complete lack of listening on their part - of the warning signs."

Dennehy said having the discussion in any specific terms earlier would not have been useful.

"We weren't empowered with numbers to make that decision," he said.

Christianson said he is concerned about the last minute details of the decision. But said the meeting Monday should help to sort those out. He said the discussion has been theoretical and with no way act on it.

This is the second time in the last 12 months there has been a difference of opinion on an agreement made between the town and the school officials. A disagreement last spring occurred because town officials thought the School Committee would waive the rent on the space at Oakmont that is being used as town offices.

"I think it illustrates the need for closure communication and more understanding of each others' problems," said Dennehy. "Yes, I think it does underscore a problem."

Dennehy said the thing that he learned was that "we must do business in an open meeting with the school committee."

He referred to conversations between himself and Christianson.

"We came away from that with me thinking one thing and him thinking something else," Dennehy said.

Christianson disagreed saying that these are not fundamental problems.

"I don't see it as an indication of anything. It is too small a town to have issues like that," he said.