$1Million Reduction Fails—

Council Votes 8-4 To Send Budget Proposal To Taxpayers For Final Say

By John Voket

The last word on whether Newtown’s proposed $106.6 million budget proposal is too high or just enough will come from taxpayers at an April 26 referendum as the Legislative Council voted 8-4 to accept the 2011-12 spending plan Wednesday as presented by the Board of Finance.

The four No votes against the full proposal were cast by Daniel Amaral, Richard Woycik, Robert Merola, and George Ferguson.

That recommendation accommodated a town request for $37,922,648 and a school district request for $68,703,427. If approved by voters in the scheduled April 26 referendum, the proposed $106,626,075 budget would generate a 2.68 percent tax increase next fiscal year, and an increase in the tax rate to 24.64 mills.

A mill represents $1 in taxes for every $1,000 in taxable property.

Before passing the recommendation to the council, finance officials reduced the school district’s original request by $497,590 to account for health insurance savings and a slight increase in fuel costs. The finance board also agreed to a $70,000 increase for a district organizational study that will be shared proportionately by the town, which is contributing $30,000 toward the overall $100,000 study.

On the town side, finance officials approved a reduction of about $274,000 in similarly adjusted health coverage totals; added $5,000 for other increased benefit costs; provided $5,000 to the Labor Day Parade Committee; added $50,572 for equipment fuel, $37,830 in borrowing interest, and $4,500 to underwrite services provided to town residents by Ability Beyond Disability, a regional human services agency.

The council’s action April 6 was not surprising as every council subcommittee recommended each respective component of the plan during their own reviews in recent weeks, and those recommendations were endorsed by the council’s finance committee Tuesday.

Making that final referral, finance committee Chairman Benjamin Spragg cited the relative spirit of cooperation that marked this year’s budget process, and said he was convinced that both the town and school district proposals were wired as tightly as they could get.

“Both the town and school indicated there was no more to remove,” Mr Spragg said, adding that the 2011-12 requests showed “more restraint than in previous budgets.”

At the same time, he echoed the sentiments of several colleagues who said the town needs to move forward into the new fiscal cycle with its eye on doing whatever is possible to control future spending.

Council Vice Chairman Mary Ann Jacob said she was pleased to see “data-driven decisions” being made throughout the budget preparation process that “took the guess work out.” But at the same time, Ms Jacob agreed with Mr Spragg, saying officials had to show “continued efforts to reduce costs.”

“I challenge leaders to work harder and smarter,” she said in endorsing the current plan. “A budget with increases year after year is not sustainable. Now it’s up to the taxpayers to tell us they support it.”

Education Committee Chair Kathryn Fetchick recognized that especially on the town side, any reductions would likely force personnel cuts, which would negatively affect service delivery.

“I don’t believe we are at a place where we can make meaningful reductions. I don’t see anywhere else to go,” Ms Fetchick said.

Following the motion to send the request to voters, Chairman Jeff Capeci recognized a suggested amendment made by Councilman Richard Woycik to reduce the town proposal by $200,000 and the school side by $800,000.

“I believe the taxpayers should have a voice before we take such a measure,” Mr Capeci said. “The people of Newtown know cuts will mean a loss of services.”

Mr Capeci added that the budget marks a historic turning point in that it finally removes any reliance on the municipal fund balance to offset tax increases. This move occurred at the strong suggestion of local finance officials as well as Moody’s Investor’s Service, which participates in rating Newtown’s credit-worthiness.

Councilman Gary Davis said while he realized “there are people in Newtown who will be hard pressed” to afford a tax increase, he suggested they concentrate their energy on state officials who have the power to offset a dependency on local property taxes.

Mr Davis said he was comfortable leaving the final decision about the spending plan before him to his constituents.

“If they want it, vote Yes, if not, we go back and do it over,” he said, adding that if taxpayers reject the plan there “won’t be any confusion,” that a No vote means the proposal is too high.

Referring to calls to find spending reductions in the proposed budget in process, Councilman James Belden commented, “Starving the beast is a good mantra, but this is a good step this year.”

Mr Woycik’s suggested reduction, which eventually failed 9-3, directed $200,000 to be reduced in the town’s contingency account. And while he recognized the council could not direct line item reductions in the school district’s proposal, his motion to reduce the request by $800,000 came with a suggestion to eliminate an new assistant principal and several teachers at the high school.

He and colleague Robert Merola both referenced down trending student populations as justification for the district to consider such action. Mr Merola, in supporting the amendment, made a brief presentation with charts detailing actual versus projected high school populations that he said drove the town to overbuild the facility.

Board of Education Chairman William Hart and Superintendent Janet Robinson both defended staffing levels and programming decisions, including choices of electives and world languages offered to students, which was another point of contention made by Mr Merola.

Councilman Dan Amaral, who has perennially advocated for zero tax increases, said the proposal, which would increase the local mill rate by more than half of one percent, is too much to expect local taxpayers to bear.

“Can we get more efficiencies some place? I think we can,” Mr Amaral said ahead of his No vote on the overall proposal. “We have to come back to reasonable.”