PORTSMOUTH — Last month the Town Council voted to increase the cost of a transfer station sticker from $150 to $160 starting Feb. 1.

But on Monday night, council member Paul Kesson said some important financial information was not disclosed to the council when it made that decision — namely, the transfer station operation’s $120,000 surplus.

Had council members known that, he said they might have voted a different way — perhaps even to lower the cost of a sticker by as much as $24, which the surplus would have covered.

As it stands, the sticker fee hike will increase the transfer station surplus by $30,0000, to $150,000 by the end of the new fiscal year, he said.

“We need a better financial statement when we make decisions. There are people living in the margins. We’re not here to build surpluses in these accounts,” Mr. Kesson said. “Whether or not we spend it, it’s just a disclosed number.” 

Town Administrator Richard Rainer Jr. said he wasn’t trying to hide anything. He purposely didn’t factor in the surplus when recommending a new sticker fee because the transfer station operates under an enterprise fund and must pay for itself.

After the meeting, Mr. Rainer said the “rainy day fund” is necessary in case of any unforeseen expenses at the station. 

It’s similar to the town’s overall fund balance, which is set aside for unexpected revenue shortfalls or budget deficits.

“It’s a fund balance for the station. What would happen if a compactor broke down, for example?” Mr. Rainer said.

The administrator, however, said he had no problem with Mr. Kesson’s suggestion and would disclose any surpluses or other pertinent financial information in the future.

The council voted unanimously that future agenda items having a financial impact on taxpayers include statements with an account balance, a revenue statement (taxes, state revenue, enterprise fees and bonds) and an expense statement. 

Billing statements debated

The vote followed a lengthy debate over billing reports that council members have been receiving on a bi-weekly basis.

According to Mr. Kesson, who previously served on the council from 2010 to 2012, the billing statements used to be much more detailed and included payroll figures. Those numbers have since disappeared from the reports, he said.

“I want to go back to the future,” Mr. Kesson said.

Elizabeth Pedro, who also served during that term, agreed. “We used to be able to see what the pension payments were,” she said.

Council President Keith Hamilton, however, said the regular list of bills is “discretionary spending” and doesn’t include “fixed items” in the budget over which the council has no control.

“I don’t believe salaries should be in the report,” he said. “You don’t need to know what our town clerk is being paid on a bi-weekly basis.”

When some council members noted that monthly check registers can be downloaded from the town’s website, Mr. Kesson and Ms. Pedro still were not satisfied. 

“This doesn’t have any accounts on it and doesn’t tell you where (the money) came from,” said Ms. Pedro.