Watertown’s Fiscal Year 2026 budget includes the addition of the Human Services Department, and City Manager George Proakis said that the budget is “being produced at a
time of significant uncertainty.”
The proposed FY26 budget of $223.66 million is $7.08 million or 3.27 percent above the revised FY25 budget, Proakis said during Tuesday’s City Council meeting.
The budget maintains the full funding of City pensions, stays on track for funding OPEB (other post employment benefits), supports stabilization funds for affordable housing, open space, and Watertown Square, and it maintains the City’s strategic reserves, Proakis said. The education budget increased by 3.5 percent, and the public safety budget (Police and Fire departments) are being funded at record levels.
The major addition to the City government is the creation of Human Services Department as part of implementation of the Health and Human Services Plan. This also includes hiring a director of Human Services — a position approved by the City Council in February during FY25.
“That position sits in the City Manager’s office in the Fiscal Year ’25 documents. The Fiscal Year ’26 budget moves that into a Human Services Department. The budget does not otherwise include significant new programs,” Proakis said. “To put that in perspective, this year, the departments had submitted to me — there’s some really good ideas and really good requests — over $5 million of additional budget requests. We approved $383,000 worth of those. So that’s about 8 percent of what was requested.”
Multiple residents and members of the Watertown Fire Department asked the Council to approve staffing to allow the WFD to run a second ambulance, to reduce response times. Proakis noted that several requested positions — including eight firefighters — were not approved, but they would undergo “further review.” Other positions include five police officers, and four full-time and two part-time Department of Public Buildings employees.
While some new positions appear under certain departments’ budgets, they were moved from another department. Overall, he said, there are no new positions added to the City staff in the proposed FY26 budget.
Funding has been set aside for improvements to Watertown Square.
“The two pieces coming next, the redevelopment planning and the streetscape design work, will start soon and continue into Fiscal Year 26,” Proakis said.
Three park projects will finish in 2025 — Arsenal Park Phase B, Saltonstall Park, and the Lowell Playground — and three more will begin — Victory Field Phase II, Bemis Park and How Park.
The Pleasant Street Shuttle will receive funding in the FY26 budget, and the ongoing mobility study will make recommendations for improvements to the shuttle operations.
The budget will place $14.7 million in a stabilization fund for the Watertown Middle School project. The current budget for the project is $84.7 million including the stabilization fund and borrowing, Proakis said. A feasibility study has been approved to figure out the cost of the project.
The City continues to work on implementing the goals in the Resilient Watertown Climate & Energy Plan. The budget includes funds to install more EV charging stations, add electric vehicles in the City’s fleet, making City buildings more energy efficient, provide information to residents about energy efficiency strategies, continue work on creating a building emissions reduction ordinance (BERDO), the tree planting program, organics recycling, and investment in stormwater infrastructure.
The City runs individual enterprise funds for water and sewer. The operations are self-funded. Proakis said the budget proposal includes a 2.8 percent increase in the water expenses and 6.1 percent higher for sewer.
Budget Challenges
The amount of anticipated revenue in Watertown’s budget from new growth — new buildings or major upgrades — has been reduced since the preliminary budget was released, Proakis said.
“When I was here in October, we had pegged new growth at about $3 million a year, this budget has it at $2.5 million,” he said. “While there are permitted life science lab buildings in Watertown, the growth forecast doesn’t anticipate that any of them will start construction in the next few years.”
Some expenses will rise significantly in FY26, Proakis said. The cost of health insurance and other employee benefits are projected to increase 16.4 percent in the budget, Proakis said, and the cost of trash and recycling is budgeted to go up 7.5 percent.
While there are some concerns about the budget, and future years’ budgets, Proakis said Watertown is in a better position than many other communities
“As I said, there’s some uncertainty overall. I think that as uncertainty goes we’re not in as tough of a situation as some others,” he said. “First of all, our direct dependency on federal funds is minimal. There are a lot of communities out there that are receiving significant federal money directly into their local budget under the Community Development Block Grant program.”
At least one federal grant that Watertown expected to receive is in jeopardy.
“We had a $4,000 grant from the Mass. Library Commissioners that we’re probably not going to see at this point because the federal government cut the funding to the agency that funds the Mass. Library Commissioners,” Proakis said.
An area of concern could be the indirect impact of cuts in federal dollars at the state level. State Aid, including the Chapter 70 school funds and Chapter 90 transportation funds, makes up about 7.5 percent of Watertown’s budget.
“This is a circumstance where even though a federal cut to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts may not say, ‘hey, Commonwealth, you know, we’re going to cut billions of dollars to something that goes directly to local government,’ they could turn around and cut Medicaid money. That is going to a program that has nothing to do with us, and if the state government says, well, we need to backfill that, and therefore we can’t spend as much on Chapter 70, school or chapter 90, transportation. That’s where we may see an impact back to our budget and financial situation.”
Other indirect impacts could be felt from the rising cost of materials due to tariffs and other factors. Higher prices could increase the cost of projects such as Victory Field Phase II — the track and courts area — as well as private construction projects in Watertown that could bring in more tax dollars.
While federal and even some state governments are undergoing significant changes, Proakis said that local government fills a different role.
“I do believe that local government can be different and should be different,” he said. “We’re closer to people, and as you know, we’re the place where residents come in to pay their taxes, talk to us about a neighborhood concern.”
He added, “So in this time of uncertainty, where a lot of folks seem to want to be pulling towards radical change, and others want to hold on to where we are now. I believe that maybe it’s the most radical change of all, but maybe it’s the most continuous move towards the right direction, is moving towards competent government.”
Proakis said competent government means working with the City Council and residents to understand the needs of the to identify the role of local government.
“Because we, in local government, we cannot and should not serve every need, but in meeting those needs that we can, and finding the most effective and efficient way of implementing solutions,” he said. “I think that’s the way we get where we need to go.”
The next step in the FY26 budget process is for the Council to review the budget department by department.
“We’ll dig into each and every one of these lines as we go through the budget in the coming weeks,” Proakis said.
City Council President Mark Sideris noted that the budget presentation took place two weeks earlier than most years. He will work with Proakis to schedule the departmental budget public hearings.
See the City Manager’s Budget Presentation slides by clicking here. More detailed information about the Fiscal Year 2026 Budget can be found here. All the FY26 budget documents are available by clicking here.
Watch a replay of the City Council meeting on Watertown Cable by clicking here.
“Watertown Will Add Human Services Department in FY26 Budget; City Faces Uncertain Financial Times”
Is it too late to SUBTRACT the wholly superfluous, redundant Human Services Department? Now that we know we don’t have the money to waste on it? We did, for one brief shining moment, not that that was any excuse. Town revenues should pay for town expenses, not a duplicative layer of management. What senior citizen or veteran or other resident receiving services will benefit from the costs incurred in funding this department? I’ve asked before, tiresomely, but no one either knows or cares. They might start when the service cuts come.
Keep asking! You are not alone with these concerns.
How’s this?
When it comes to the Human Services Director, I acknowledge the wisdom of The Ink Spots: “It’s all over but the crying.” The Town has already given the go-ahead and approved the first payment of $38,000. “[C]ollaboration among and between the existing network of City departments and community providers” here we come. Who could object? Well…
As already demonstrated, I let the position and department speak for themselves. I disagree with the initiative, but mean no (or very little) disrespect to those elected officials or private citizens who disagree with me. The eyes of the beholder will determine whether such active verbs as “create”, “establish”, and “improve” are inspirational or delusional.
“Watertown needs designated leadership [at $115,808 annual salary, as listed] to address Watertown residents’ human service needs [presumably with support staff],” the report by Health Management Associates (HMA) states. I am already skeptical, I confess, as I this is the approach I would expect from consultants, who tend to be long on ideas, their specialty, but short on delivery. I ask why existing management (with increase in support staff when necessary) couldn’t adopt recommended improvements at a lesser cost—if at all.
A “dedicated, cross-functional Health and Human Services Cabinet would significantly enhance resident well-being”, the report continues, and would consist of the following:
“Human Services Director, Public Health Director, Senior Services Director, Veterans Services Officer/Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Coordinator, Community Wellness Program Manager, Housing Authority representative, Recreation Director, Public Library representative, Schools Liaison, Police Liaison, Department of Public Works, and organizations contracted to provide key services to the City.”
That’s four directors, along with various managers, coordinators, liaisons, and representatives already on the payroll, as well as unnumbered organizations doing theirs. [A Town Councilor even suggested the “cabinet needs to include community folks with lived experience”—which reminds me of Jaws: “we’re going to need a bigger boat”.] One Town service director might need to communicate with another on occasion—I’m sure they already do. But all of them together? DPW and WPL? To accomplish what exactly? More specifically, please, than “a comprehensive and coordinated approach to health and social services.”
A rare point of agreement: “Watertown should improve digital front door awareness and access to health and human services by enhancing the user experience of Watertown’s website”. This should be the first line of response to residents looking for information. With some exceptions, people can access all they need online. With a few keystrokes, I found names, tel. numbers, and emails of almost all Town directors and staff.
For those who can’t: “Watertown should establish a physical front door location to its health and human services”. Office space, in other words. “The Parker Annex Building could serve as a hub for health and human services.” The Health Department moved there in 2024. Curiously, when coordination seems so sorely needed, other social services did not follow. Veterans, Seniors, and the Housing Authority are in three separate locations. Some hub.
There’s more: the DHS would oversee the relocation of the food pantry to allow for expanded hours of operation—which I think the food pantry and Town Manager could manage alone; the DHS would also “establish relationships with community-based organizations” (CBOs)—which sounds like a duplication of the organizations already “contracted to provide key services” in the DHS cabinet, above.
Last point: “To foster a more inclusive and equitable community, Watertown should establish a comprehensive diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) strategy.” I don’t dispute that the Town might establish such a strategy; I dispute HMA’s first recommendation: “establishing a DEI Director position”. Another director position, at commensurate salary, commensurately staffed and housed. All before any actual diversity, equity, or inclusion are abstractly or concretely defined, let alone accomplished. This is not an aberration unique to DEI: in reading the minutes of HMA’s presentation to the Town Council, I noted Councilors and residents suggested even more positions and services: a “housing specialist”, a separate “disability director”; “tenant-landlord counseling and mediation”. Another resident “addressed the problematic nature of the term DEI and encouraged the committee to consider
alternative terminology.” Wasn’t me.
All of this is well underway, scheduled to be fully implemented within the next year. Everybody seemed happy at the time; now that the bill is coming due, maybe not so much. I’m no expert in human resource costs (salary, benefits, office space and infrastructure), but these plans alone could amount to half a million dollars—a year—or more. I ask Watertown Seniors, Veterans, those with food or housing insecurity, and so many others: what could you do with—rather, what could we do for you with that money? If there are any gaps in service, would you rather speak to the manager’s manager, or avoid gaps by seeing someone a little more hands-on, processing claims for a more modest wage? To say nothing of what parks could be upgraded, what roads could be paved, what rainy day fund could be topped up (even what taxes could be cut—hey, it was worth a shot). Our years have plenty have passed; times will be leaner. I love the Ink Spots, but last word goes to poet John Greenleaf Whittier: “It might have been.”
We have a State Human Services Department. Why are we duplicating bureaucracy? It should be state or municipal. We should not be paying for both.