Against the strong objections of the chairman of the finance advisory committee, and one of its own members, the Oak Bluffs selectmen on Tuesday voted to adopt a $24.5 million budget for next year, approving several budget overrides and putting salary increases for town and school employees back into the budget at the last minute.

Selectmen voted to adopt the finance committee’s recommended budget, which initially called for $847,000 to be placed on an override question of Proposition 2 1/2, the state law which limits the annual increase in a community’s tax levy to 2.5 per cent. But before doing so the selectmen made several changes to the finance committee’s plan, including moving $250,000 in salary increases — $127,000 for school employees and $123,000 for town employees — from an override question, back into the budget.

The approved budget represents a 3.9 per cent increase over the current fiscal year budget. Taxes would rise a seven per cent if voters approved all the override questions selectmen approved this week — the 2.5 per cent allowed under state law plus another 4.5 percent for the overrides.

The finance committee was charged this year with making up a nearly $1.7 million shortfall, the third year in a row the town has faced a large deficit. Last year voters at a special town meeting agreed to cut $500,000 from this year’s budget, requiring two town employees to be laid off and two others to have their hours cut in half. No further job cuts are outlined in the 2011 budget plan.

The approved budget forcasts more revenue from various sources, including an assumption that voters will approve a new 0.75 per cent meals tax, which is projected to bring in $200,000. Ferry fees are slated to bring in $195,000 more, and there is a $156,000 surplus projected from wastewater fees, plus a $140,000 surplus from plans to make trash collection self-sustaining through larger fees.

But it was the two separate overrides for salary increases for the town and school employees that formed the center of debate at Tuesday’s meeting. Finance committee chairman Mimi Davisson said her committee made a conscious decision to give voters options this year in the form of override questions.

“This has been a tough year, and I don’t have a lot of confidence some of these overrides are going to pass,” Ms. Davisson said.

She noted the town is contractually obligated to pay the salary increases, even if the override questions are defeated at town meeting. But if voters did reject the salary increases, the town would be forced to make up the shortfall in other areas, possibly with cuts in staff and programs, she said.

But a majority of the selectmen, with the exception of Kerry Scott, disagreed. They argued that it would be disingenuous to present overrides for salary increases to voters at town meeting, when the town has no choice to pay them anyway.

“There are contractual obligations,” chairman Gregory Coogan said. “We negotiated these in good faith and I think we should honor that. It’s not like we haven’t done belt-tightening already, because we have.”

“It would be wrong to say to the people: we want you to vote for this, but if you don’t we’re just going to [pay the salary increases] anyway. We made a promise to our workers, and we should keep that promise,” agreed selectman Ron DiOrio.

The board voted 4-1 to fold the overrides back into the budget, with Ms. Scott dissenting. To balance the measure, selectmen voted to remove $95,000 for the triennial property revaluation from the budget and instead pay for it from the town’s stabilization fund, which now stands at $1.3 million.

Town administrator Michael Dutton said there is a chance the town can put off the property revaluation for another year; the state legislature is considering a bill that would allow towns to perform revaluations every four years, instead of every three years as it does now. If the bill is defeated, the town could consider the $95,000 at a special town meeting in the fall, he said.

Selectmen also took a gamble by applying $100,000 in anticipated additional room taxes towards the increase in salaries for town employees, allowing them to remove that question from the override ballot.

Mr. DiOrio said voters will consider an article at town meeting in April to increase the current tax on hotel rooms from nine to 11 per cent, which could generate $100,000 in revenue, which could then be applied to the salary increases.

“[The higher hotel tax] has already been enacted, along with a higher meals tax, in over 80 communities. And will be by another 250, by the time we get through the fall town meeting. And in all those 80 communities the revenues are running substantially higher than they projected. So I think [$100,000] is a very safe number to use here,” he said.

“That $100,000 would come from visitors, would spare taxpayers, and take one big item off the overrides,” Mr. Coogan said agreed.

In total selectmen reduced the finance committee’s recommendation of $847,000 in overrides down to $600,000, most of which propose to restore cuts made last year.

One override question would restore $31,000 for an administrator position in the board of health eliminated last year as part of Mr. Dutton’s cost-cutting plan. But it turned out the position could not be cut without authorization from the town union. The administrator, Nat Woodruff, never technically left the job and has continued to work since she was laid off in September.

Voters also will consider an override for $75,000 to restore lifeguards at the town beaches; another $109,000 to restore police department cuts; $31,000 to be restored to the assessor’s office, and $18,000 to the shellfish department.

Other overrides would see $30,000 for public building maintenance and $68,000 for fire department salaries, which includes a salary increase for the fire chief from $12,000 to $48,000. Voters will also consider an override to restore $220,000 for street paving and repairs.

Throughout the meeting, Ms. Scott criticized this year’s budgeting process, questioning why selectmen were only now reviewing the budget when the deadline to go to press is this Friday, saying, “This is the first time we’ve seen this, and I have about 500 questions that I know won’t be answered.”

But Ms. Davisson argued that selectmen were given ample opportunities to get involved.

“I know at least one selectmen was at every single meeting we held. We had an information session in January and a televised session in February. We had a hearing just last week, and we will have one on Saturday . . . there have been plenty of chances for selectmen to get involved. You are voters just like the rest of us,” she said.

Following the meeting Ms. Scott explained that she was disappointed selectmen had to wait until the last minute to formally make decisions concerning the budget.

“The selectmen [Tuesday] night approved an override election and override articles for the town meeting warrant with no discussion whatsoever about the budget at the selectmen’s level. We haven’t once ídiscussed the budget detail. This is not the fault of the finance committee — it’s our own fault,” she said, adding:

“Essentially, I feel we abdicated all of our fiscal responsibility to the FinCom,” she said.

The finance committee will hold an open informational meeting on the fiscal year 2011 budget tomorrow morning, Saturday, March 13 at 10 a.m. at the town library on Pacific avenue.