'['[# CSKE Whole-Picture Reporting Coverage Gap Review

**Review date:** August 14, 2026  
**Database checkpoint reviewed:** `20260814 v2 Checkpoint.zip`  
**Database capture time:** August 14, 2026 at 1:17:58 p.m. EDT  
**Reporting package reviewed:** `CSKE-Whole-Picture-Town-Decision-Guide-v0.3.4-20260814`  
**Purpose:** Identify loaded database content and reporting-ready schema that the current Whole-Picture reporting does not yet use.

## Executive finding

The current reporting covers a substantial portion of Town accounting, published budget trends, Proposition 2½, debt snapshots, grants, town-owned parcels, the 2021 capital assessment, and selected HWRSD finance measures. It does **not** yet cover the newly loaded 2026 Annual Town Meeting record or several older, already-loaded domains.

The checkpoint contains **321 base tables, 5,078 columns, and 52 views**. The two live database reporting programs used by the v0.3.4 launcher directly reference 92 relations. After expanding the dependencies of the referenced views, they reach **117 base tables**. This leaves **182 nonempty base tables containing 308,879 rows** outside the live reporting query path. That row total is not a count of unique business facts: it includes source lines, numeric tokens, crosswalks, and QA records as well as normalized business data.

The most material omission is the new Annual Town Meeting domain:

- All **34 nonempty `atm_*` base tables** are unused by the reporting queries.
- All **nine reporting-ready `atm_v_*` views** are unused.
- The omitted domain contains **11,957 rows**: 2,764 business, reference, and control rows plus 9,193 page, line, and numeric-token provenance rows.
- The current reports mention Town Meeting and several warrant articles in explanatory prose, but no report is generated from the loaded warrant, motions, votes, recommendations, article facts, or final-voted budget data.

## 1. Annual Town Meeting warrant, motions, votes, and outcomes are not reported

The database now contains a normalized record of the 2026 Annual Town Meeting, but the current report does not show the actual meeting decisions.

### Loaded but not reported

| Reporting subject | Loaded database content |
|---|---:|
| Warrant and articles | 1 warrant; 43 articles; 1 execution record; 3 signatories; 2 warrant-source records |
| Motions and article links | 93 motions; 105 motion-to-article links |
| Votes and links | 34 votes; 46 vote-to-article links; 34 vote-to-motion links |
| Recommendations | 34 recommendations |
| Article facts | 120 facts across proposed, anticipated-motion, and final-voted stages |
| Article-specific actions | 13 law actions; 3 property actions; 5 official selections; 8 exhibits |
| Revolving funds | 5 revolving-fund authorizations |
| Meeting and election administration | 1 meeting; 7 events; 9 meeting people; 13 guidance records; 5 parliamentary rules; 1 election; 9 election offices |
| Reference and unresolved controls | 84 glossary entries; 11 follow-ups |

### Reporting capability already present but unused

- `atm_v_article_outcome` combines each warrant article with its reported outcome, vote basis, vote count availability, consent-agenda status, petitioned status, and required threshold.
- `atm_v_vote_result` connects the vote, article, motion, outcome, method, basis, and any reported tally.
- `atm_v_article_fact_current` provides current article facts with their stage, source file, source page, and verification status.
- `atm_v_appropriation_stage_comparison` compares pre-meeting proposed, anticipated-motion, and final-voted values.
- `atm_v_reporting_bridge` creates a common reporting stream for article facts and budget facts.

### Consequence for the current report

The current report explains what Town Meeting and a warrant article are, but it does not answer the database-supported questions:

- What did each of the 43 articles ask voters to decide?
- Which articles were on the consent agenda or were citizen-petitioned?
- What vote threshold applied, and was the outcome supported by a numeric tally or only a reported voice-vote result?
- What did the Select Board and Finance Committee recommend?
- How did the anticipated motion differ from the warrant text?
- What was finally voted?
- Which legal, property, officer-selection, revolving-fund, and capital actions were approved or rejected?
- Which 11 Annual Town Meeting follow-ups remain unresolved?

The reporting should also surface the control already embedded in `atm_v_article_outcome`: Article 40 has an open vote-threshold discrepancy. Omitting the ATM control layer means a user cannot see this warning in the current report.

## 2. The preliminary-to-final FY2027 budget lifecycle is not reported

The new schema implements the exact budget lifecycle that the reporting previously lacked. The current report still relies on the FY2027 Expense Control Report and older published high-level budget comparisons; it does not use the Annual Town Meeting budget-version data.

### Loaded but not reported

- **3 budget versions** covering the Select Board pre-meeting proposal, the meeting-presented workbook, and the final-voted budget.
- **294 versioned budget lines**.
- **1,764 budget facts** with fiscal year, stage, value, raw source value, cell status, and verification status.
- **13 presentation categories**.
- A direct `town_acct_account_id` field on the budget-line table, allowing mapped warrant rows to connect to the 473 FY2027 Town accounting accounts.

### Reporting-ready views not used

- `atm_v_budget_comparison` provides the complete versioned row and fact detail.
- `atm_v_budget_lifecycle` places preliminary, workbook-presented, and final-voted values beside one another and calculates preliminary-to-presented and presented-to-final changes.
- `atm_v_budget_version_change` calculates dollar and percentage change between every successive version.
- `atm_v_appropriation_stage_comparison` performs the related proposed-to-final comparison at the article-fact level.

### Consequence for the current report

The current reporting does not yet show:

- Every row and column of the preliminary, workbook-presented, and final-voted budget in one comparable structure.
- Which budget lines changed before the workbook was published.
- Which budget lines changed at Town Meeting.
- Whether a changed line was mapped to a normalized Town accounting account.
- The final-voted FY2027 baseline that should be used for future budget-to-actual reporting.
- A reconciliation from final-voted budget lines to the FY2027 account-level expense-control report.

This is the most important immediate reporting addition because the data and comparison views are already present.

## 3. Capital-project sources, uses, financing, and operating effects are not reported

The current reporting includes the 2021 Capital Needs Assessment and high-level debt information. It does not use the separate `cap_project*` domain added with the recent official-statement work.

### Loaded but not reported

| Relation family | Rows | Reporting value currently omitted |
|---|---:|---|
| `cap_project` | 5 | Project identity, ownership, responsible department, authorization date, status, and purpose |
| `cap_project_component` | 6 | Project components and component costs |
| `cap_project_funding` | 20 | Funding sources and amounts |
| `cap_project_cost_observation` | 9 | Project cost measures and measurement bases |
| `cap_project_financing_cost` | 5 | Principal basis, financing cost, total debt service, and allocation method |
| `cap_project_interim_financing` | 2 | Temporary financing amount, rate, issue date, and maturity |
| `cap_project_issue_bridge` | 5 | Project-to-debt-issue relationship and allocated par |
| `cap_project_operating_context_series` | 26 | Multi-period operating measures linked to projects |
| `cap_project_service_metric` | 72 | Service and outcome measures |
| `cap_project_context_observation` | 14 | Nonfinancial project context |
| `cap_project_reconciliation` | 5 | Project-level control comparisons |

### Consequence for the current report

The report cannot yet present a project-level sources-and-uses statement or connect a project in one place to its authorization, interim financing, permanent issue, financing cost, funding sources, operating context, service need, and reconciliation status. This also prevents the 2021 facility-condition evidence from being joined to later project decisions and actual financing.

## 4. Security-level debt, contractual cash flow, and legal terms are not reported

The current debt report uses issue summaries, debt-service snapshots, position snapshots, purposes, tax treatment, and issue relationships. The database contains substantially more detailed debt data that is not queried.

### Loaded business detail omitted from reporting

- **3,258 contractual cash-flow rows** in `sec_contractual_cash_flow`.
- **185 securities**, **185 rate terms**, and **185 initial-pricing records**.
- **31 sinking-fund schedule rows**.
- **6 issue-authorization records**, including article or question, purpose, amount, and legal authority.
- **2 BAN term records** and **2 lifecycle links**.
- **78 continuing-disclosure terms**.
- **10 redemption/call-term records**.
- **33 issue-party roles**.
- **141 official-statement business facts**.
- **21 debt-funding observations**.
- **1 direct-loan obligation**.
- **12 preliminary-to-final official-statement changes** and 32 versioned debt-service rows.

### Reporting-ready views not used

- `sec_contractual_cash_flow_detail_v`
- `sec_debt_issue_legal_detail_v`
- `sec_security_canonical_detail_v`
- `sec_security_maturity_detail_v`

### Consequence for the current report

The current report remains snapshot-oriented. It does not yet provide:

- A security-by-security maturity and coupon schedule.
- A current contractual payment calendar derived from the detailed cash flows.
- A direct bridge from Town Meeting authorization to debt issue and project.
- BAN-to-permanent-financing lifecycle reporting.
- Call, redemption, purchaser, rating, pricing, yield, and continuing-disclosure terms.
- A complete issue-level sources-and-uses and refinancing history.

The large official-statement source-control population—pages, source lines, numeric tokens, page reviews, version maps, and source-to-target crosswalks—is also not exposed in the report's evidence map. Those are primarily audit-trail records rather than end-user financial measures, but they should support drill-through and QA status for the reported debt facts.

## 5. HWRSD operations, governance, workforce, reserves, and service facts are not reported

The current HWRSD section reports budget, enrollment, member allocation, debt service, state aid, selected finance facts, bargaining units, special-education costs, facilities, and open questions. Eleven nonempty HWRSD business tables remain outside its query path.

| Unused relation | Rows | Missing reporting subject |
|---|---:|---|
| `sch_asset_class_fact` | 7 | School asset-class information |
| `sch_business_fact` | 12 | General normalized District business facts |
| `sch_facility_capital_event` | 5 | Facility capital history/events |
| `sch_finance_rule_fact` | 12 | Financial rules and constraints |
| `sch_governance_fact` | 20 | Governance structure and practices |
| `sch_official_term_fact` | 10 | Official roles and terms |
| `sch_operating_relationship_fact` | 7 | Operating and interorganizational relationships |
| `sch_operational_challenge_fact` | 8 | Documented operational challenges |
| `sch_program_service_fact` | 8 | Programs and services |
| `sch_reserve_fact` | 15 | District reserves |
| `sch_workforce_fact` | 8 | Workforce measures and their limitations |

The reporting-ready `sch_v_governance_operations_profile` view is also unused. As a result, the HWRSD report remains predominantly financial and does not yet use the loaded evidence about how the District is governed, staffed, operated, constrained, and delivering services.

## 6. Full audited-statement, nonmajor-fund, note, and supporting-schedule data are not reported

The current report extracts 967 normalized audit schedule facts and uses selected subsets for debt instruments, capital-asset rollforwards, transfers, pension, and OPEB. It does not query 15 other nonempty audit tables containing 9,346 rows.

### Loaded but not reported

- 20 financial statements, 488 statement rows, and 990 statement values.
- 107 supporting sections, 2,513 supporting rows, and 3,816 supporting values.
- 544 nonmajor-fund facts.
- 127 normalized audit business facts.
- 659 schedule-cell facts and 28 schedule-inventory records.
- Audit engagement, opinion, report-section inventory, 24 notes, and 15 note-inventory records.

### Reporting-ready views not used

- `finrpt_audit_statement_value_detail_v`
- `finrpt_v_audit_nonmajor_fund_summary`

### Consequence for the current report

The technical appendix contains selected audit facts, but it does not provide a complete statement walk-down, nonmajor-fund summary, note index, opinion/engagement presentation, or supporting-schedule drill-through. It therefore leaves loaded information about governmental and business-type financial position, activities, fund statements, nonmajor funds, and note disclosures outside the reporting layer.

## 7. Normalized financial observations and the disclosure compliance event are not reported

The current report often queries detailed disclosure semantic rows and values directly. It does not use several normalized financial-reporting layers that were designed to make cross-period and cross-source reporting easier.

### Loaded but not reported

- `finrpt_general_fund_fact`: 212 rows.
- `finrpt_observation`: 254 rows.
- `finrpt_ref_metric`: 135 metric definitions.
- `finrpt_disclosure_normalized_observation`: 8 rows.
- `finrpt_disclosure_observation_bridge`: 68 links.
- `map_finrpt_audit_disclosure`: 8 audit-to-disclosure mappings.
- `finrpt_disclosure_compliance_event`: 1 event.
- `control_finrpt_disclosure_follow_up`: 3 follow-ups.

### Reporting-ready views not used

- `finrpt_observation_detail_v`
- `finrpt_observation_metric_time_series_v`
- `finrpt_v_general_fund_comparative`
- `finrpt_disclosure_normalized_observation_detail_v`
- `finrpt_disclosure_debt_observation_v`
- `finrpt_disclosure_tax_prop25_observation_v`

### Consequence for the current report

The report does not yet use the canonical metric/time-series layer, and it does not surface the loaded disclosure compliance event or all disclosure follow-ups. This is particularly material to the question of modified filings and late-filing history: the database now contains a compliance-event record, but the report does not present it.

Detailed disclosure pages, lines, numeric evidence, semantic tokens, source locators, page-schema reviews, coverage controls, and token dispositions are also outside the reporting query path. Like the official-statement source controls, these should primarily support evidence drill-through and extraction-quality reporting rather than become standalone resident-facing tables.

## 8. Property-card detail, assessment history, and parcel QA are only partially reported

The current parcel section uses the current parcel roster, ownership, valuation, assessment totals, and managed-asset links. It does not use most of the loaded property-card detail.

### Loaded detail omitted from reporting

- 801 assessment components.
- 305 land records.
- 278 sale-history records.
- 197 construction summaries.
- 483 property-card notes.
- 23 outbuildings plus building/section and site-feature records.
- 7 visit/change-history records and 4 parcel-identity events.
- 197 card summaries and 197 reconciliation references.
- 17 open GIS-card follow-ups and 1,042 extraction-QA rows.
- 220 parcel-to-assessment-account links.

The views `v_gis_card_improvements`, `v_gis_card_sale_history`, and `v_gis_card_valuation` are unused. The report uses one private residential account as a household example, but it does not provide the loaded multi-year assessment histories for the full 220-account population or report the assessment finding and its linked observations.

## 9. Property constraints and environmental research are not reported

All 10 nonempty property-constraint and environmental tables are outside the current reporting query path.

### Loaded but not reported

- 4 constraints.
- 5 constraint-to-asset links and 6 constraint-to-parcel links.
- 12 investigations and 13 possible outcomes.
- 5 evidence links and 1 linked feature.
- 1 environmental feature linked to 2 parcels.
- 219 property-research units.

The current parcel and asset sections therefore show ownership, valuation, and 2021 condition evidence without showing loaded development constraints, environmental features, investigations, possible outcomes, or their evidence links.

## 10. The database-backed scenario model is not used

The current guide presents a decision framework and discusses choices, but none of the 13 nonempty scenario tables are queried. The omitted domain contains 128 rows.

### Loaded but not reported

- 4 scenario families, 6 variants, and 6 version records.
- 32 asset actions and 18 function assignments.
- 13 parameter definitions and 6 parameter values.
- 8 execution requirements, 8 requirement constraints, and 7 risks.
- 6 delivery components and 2 leaseback terms.
- 12 action-type references.

### Consequence for the current report

The report does not yet produce a database-controlled comparison of the building-use scenarios. It cannot show each scenario's asset actions, function moves, assumptions, constraints, dependencies, risks, delivery components, leaseback terms, version, or evidence status beside the financial and service measures.

## 11. The core asset/building registry and database provenance graph are not fully surfaced

The capital-assessment section uses the core asset and building tables for the 2021 study slice, and the parcel section uses selected asset-to-parcel links. It does not provide a complete current registry of all 22 assets, 30 buildings, 23 asset-to-parcel links, and 30 building-to-parcel links. Building-to-parcel links are not reached by the live report queries.

The database also contains provenance relationships that are absent from the output evidence map:

- 49 source-artifact aliases.
- 26 source-artifact relationships.
- 4 source-artifact quality exceptions.
- 6 source systems.

The current evidence map inventories generated files and CSV extracts. It does not show the database's artifact-version, supersession, relationship, alias, and quality-exception graph.

## 12. Cross-domain reporting that the loaded data now makes possible is missing

The largest value of the new database content is not another isolated table. It is the ability to connect decisions across domains. The following integrated reporting chains do not yet exist:

1. **Budget lifecycle:** Select Board preliminary budget → meeting workbook → final-voted budget → normalized Town account → later budget-to-actual result.
2. **Article decision:** warrant article → anticipated/final motion → recommendation → vote outcome → final financial fact.
3. **Capital authorization:** warrant article → project → funding sources → interim financing → permanent debt issue → contractual cash flows → Proposition 2½ treatment.
4. **Facility decision:** core asset/building/parcel → environmental or legal constraint → 2021 condition assessment → later capital project → service metric → scenario action.
5. **Grant funding:** grant program/instrument/award → project or article → match requirement → appropriation → receipt and expenditure account → closeout.
6. **HWRSD burden:** District budget and operations → Wilbraham assessment → Town Meeting appropriation → Town accounting account → levy and household bridge.
7. **Evidence lineage:** reported number → normalized fact → source locator/page → source artifact and artifact relationship → extraction or quality exception.

## Priority order for expanding the reporting

| Priority | Reporting addition | Reason |
|---:|---|---|
| 1 | Annual Town Meeting overview, article outcomes, and open controls | Newly loaded, decision-critical, and already supported by reporting views |
| 2 | Three-version FY2027 budget lifecycle and final-voted baseline | Directly answers what changed from preliminary to workbook to final vote |
| 3 | Project sources, uses, financing, and article/debt bridge | Converts debt and capital facts into project decisions |
| 4 | Security-level debt and contractual payment schedule | Uses the detailed issue, security, and cash-flow data already loaded |
| 5 | HWRSD governance, operations, workforce, reserves, and services | Balances the current finance-heavy District reporting |
| 6 | Complete audit-statement, nonmajor-fund, note, and compliance-event reporting | Uses normalized financial data already present and surfaces filing history |
| 7 | Database-backed scenario comparison | Connects choices, assets, constraints, risks, services, and finances |
| 8 | Property-card detail and property/environmental constraints | Deepens asset and development analysis beyond ownership and valuation |
| 9 | Provenance and QA drill-through | Makes the evidence and exception controls visible without overwhelming the main reports |

## Review boundary

- The checkpoint ZIP and both enclosed SHA-256 values were validated against the enclosed database backup and catalog ZIP.
- The schema/catalog capture reports `SUCCESS`, PostgreSQL 18.4, 321 base tables, 5,078 columns, 52 views, 832 indexes, and migration `0100_WILBRAHAM_2026_ANNUAL_TOWN_MEETING_V01` loaded.
- This was a read-only comparison of the captured catalog/schema and the v0.3.4 reporting package. The custom database backup was not restored into a separate PostgreSQL instance.
- A relation was treated as included when it was directly queried by the launcher-generated live reports or was a base-table dependency of a queried view. Static explanatory prose was not treated as database reporting.
- Zero-row receiving tables were not counted as omitted loaded data. Examples include the current empty receiving areas for certain tax-base details, school facility condition, compensation contracts, placement costs, and security position snapshots.
- Some queried tables are extracted to the technical appendix but only selectively summarized in the rendered reports. Therefore, this review identifies definite omissions; it does not claim that every field in the 117 reached tables is already explained adequately to residents or decision-makers.