ROYALSTON- – Results from Thursday’s special election in Royalston offer mixed results for town officials and others who were hoping all three Proposition 2½ ballot questions would be supported voters.
Only one of the three questions, which would help fund the hiring of two full-time police officers, was approved by a very slim margin. The other two questions, which sought funding to supplement the municipal budget and to hire a town administrator, went down in defeat.
A total of 275 voters, or nearly 25% of those registered, showed up to cast ballots.
With the passage of Question 1, Royalston will now have nearly $173,000 to hire two full-time officers, one of whom will serve as department chief. The measure was approved by a vote of 140-135; close, but not as close as the 111-111 vote which doomed a similar proposal in the special election held in August 2024. Funds will be used to hire one full-time patrol officer, as well as a chief, who will be responsible for administrative duties and who will also patrol the community when not attending to those responsibilities.
“I’m glad it passed,” said Selectboard member Linda Alger, “because having a part-time police force is just not tenable anymore. I think the next step for the board will be to assign a search committee. I’d like to do it fairly quickly, but that’s only my opinion. The sooner we do it and implement it, the sooner we see the police presence increasing. That will speak volumes.”
Alger said she was disappointed to see the defeat of Question 2, which sought $155,000 to help cover some general government expenses, as well as the town’s assessment for the Athol Royalston Regional School District. Despite the decision of the voters, Alger said no cuts would need to be made in the current FY26 budget.
“We balanced the budget, so we don’t have to make any further cuts,” she said.
She explained that the cost of an audit of town finances and the remediation of an oil spill were paid for out of the town’s stabilization fund, “so, in the event that this didn’t pass we could still pay for them. The only reason we were able to do that was because free cash was higher than expected.”
The defeat of Question 2 by a 144-130 margin, she said, will make budgeting tougher in years to come, Alger continued.
“We are scraping the bottom of the barrel every year,” she said. “There are increases that we need to absorb that we have no control over. Health insurance has increased, school assessments continue to increase way over 2½%. I just don’t think people understand that. I’ve looked at a lot of the Facebook rants, and people think we’re giving them a blank check. That’s nonsense. I don’t know where they’re getting that impression. The school is going to continue to be difficult to fund when we don’t know what the (state mandated) local contribution will be. We get this bill every year that we have no idea how much it’s going to be.”
Question 3, which asked for $85,000 to fire a full-time town administrator, was defeated by a vote of 151-123. That came as a big disappointment to Alger, who said, “It would have paid for itself. I don’t think people realize the impact. I’m not running in April so, unless they elected someone else who is retired, we miss the boat on a lot of things. I attend daytime meetings probably three or four times a week because I’m the one that’s available.”
Selectboard chair Bill Chapman said he was “very happy” with the police vote, “but it is a missed opportunity on the other two. Sadly, the town will feel the pain from voting ‘no’ on those two. Both were needed and would have greatly benefitted the town.”
“That [“town administrator] position would have been able to pay for itself through grants and certainly would keep us out of legal trouble with the knowledge that person would have,” he said. “The townspeople should know they lost out immensely by not having that position filled.”
Alger said an administrative assistant, in addition to applying for state and federal grants, would have been able to make decisions quickly, without having to wait for the Selectboard to decide. She noted that a request to use the town’s electronic message board to publicize an upcoming movie night on Sept. 13 had to be denied because the board doesn’t meet again until Sept. 16.
“If we had somebody, an administrator, watching out for those kinds of things, it could be easily approved,” Alger said. “And if we did approve use of the sign before our next meeting, someone would complain about an open meeting violation.”
As for the lost opportunity to secure additional state and federal funding due to lack of an administrator, Alger said, “I’ll bet we give up applying for at least one grant a week because none of us (on the board) have the time to do that. And we get notifications all the time. Luckily, we have department heads who are applying for their own grants, but none of the rest of us have the time to write all those other grants that are available.”
Alger said it’s likely another attempt to fund a town administrator’s position will be made in the near future. “It’s got to be done,” she said. “The town is missing out on a lot. I think it could pass with a greater effort to educate the public.”