Council Settles On $105.6 Million Second-Round Budget Request

By John Voket

There were motions to add money back and to take more money out; there were questions and presentations; even an accusation of political grandstanding. But almost exactly three hours after the Legislative Council convened a special meeting Tuesday evening, the panel agreed in a 9-3 vote to send a $105.6 million second round budget request to referendum.

If that revised proposal totaling $105,555,075 passes at referendum it would increase the local mill rate from 24.00 to 24.37. A mill equals $1 in taxation for every $1,000 in taxable property.

Council representatives Kevin Fitzgerald, Daniel Amaral, and Richard Woycik did not support that final motion. The move reflects an approximate one-percent reduction to the first round request that failed by 266 votes on April 26.

By the numbers, a motion to reduce the town-side request from $37,922,648 to $37,583,648 passed 10-2 with Mr Amaral and Councilman Robert Merola in dissent. The school district request was reduced from $68,703,427 to $67,971,427, also with Mr Amaral, Mr Fitzgerald, and Mr Woycik voting No.

One day after the failed referendum, the council directed the Boards of Selectmen and Education to meet and cut at least one percent from each side, or to work cooperatively to return with at least a one percent overall second-round request. They also requested the boards show where real “structural” changes would be affected as a result of those reductions.

On Monday, May 2, the two boards, in separate meetings, crafted the advised reductions, and on Tuesday, First Selectman Pat Llodra and school board Chairman William Hart came to the council with those presentations.

While Mrs Llodra presented targeted reductions already approved by her board, Mr Hart came with his board’s commitment to honor the overall reduction, but only provided ideas about where school officials might achieve those cuts. The school board will not take action on its suggested reductions, nor the means to achieve them, until the taxpayers endorse a 2011-12 spending plan in referendum, Mr Hart reported.

Showing The Money

The suggested district reductions came with some degree of controversy because they encompass the removal of 20 or more educational assistants (EAs), while preserving a new assistant principal (AP) position at Newtown High School.

Other costs or positions to be considered for removal from the school’s 2011-12 budget include $30,000 from allocated costs for an efficiency study with the town, and two behavior therapists for a savings of $48,000, $60,000 for supplies, $33,000 for equipment, and $10,000 for furniture.

An expected paving project at Newtown Middle School could be moved to another budget year, saving $95,000; a social worker could be removed, saving $69,000; a third grade teacher position at Middle Gate may be removed, saving $67,000; along with a Hawley first grade teacher, saving $57,000.

The largest single reduction, however, would constitute a reduction of education assistants not associated with special education that could save $394,000.

The school board’s approved overall reduction equaled $853,000. School board Vice Chair Debbie Leidlein was the only member of the board to vote against both motions during the evening.

Mrs Llodra said $86,000 will be saved because parks groundskeepers will take over maintenance duties at Fairfield Hills formerly contracted to an outside vendor through the campus’s management agent.

The town hall board’s financial management, formerly handled by a staffer, will be rolled into the town’s finance office. This will reduce by $5,000 the salary line the board of managers requested to fill an already vacant post.

In addition, $35,841 will be saved because departing veteran police personnel will be replaced by lower paid new hires, and the communications department will mange $6,500 in reductions by cutting training and uniform allowances among various expenses.

Town Jobs Eliminated

Positions in the tax and assessor’s department as well as the police records department will be eliminated, saving about $63,000, and a half-time post in the land use office will be eliminated, or see duties distributed to other staffers, saving $19,000.

Parks reductions, primarily to the lifeguard staffing line, will cause the Treadwell pool and Eichler’s beach to close an hour earlier, and will temporarily push opening hours at those facilities from 10 am to noon between Memorial Day and the end of school, saving $20,000.

The town clerk will go without “short-term” summer and temp workers, typically contracted to local college students, who help with special projects and indexing, saving $7,500

A program to replace patrol cars for the police will be scaled back from four to three annual replacements, creating sustained savings of $30,000 per year. And an $8,000 reduction at the library, Mrs Llodra suggested, may be reflected in a corresponding cut in hours of operation.

As a result of staff reductions, the town will also budget $26,991 less in employee benefits.

A suggestion to reduce a full-time senior center employee to part-time, saving $19,000, represented the only suggested town-side reduction that was temporarily shelved, but will likely come up as a further reduction if the second-round referendum fails.

 

Motions Passed & Failed

During council deliberation on the town-side budget, an amendment from Mr Woycik to remove $5,000 earmarked for an assistant to the Economic Development Commission passed 7-4. Mr Fitzgerald then requested the $20,000 for lifeguards be restored to preserve the extra hour of swimming time at Eichler’s Beach and Treadwell Pool, but that motion failed 10-2.

Much of the discussion and many questions following Mr Hart’s presentation involved the assistant principal and educational assistants. Council Vice Chair Mary Ann Jacob asked why adding the administrator, with its $123,000 salary plus benefits, was more important to preserve than 20 EAs.

Mr Hart replied that the high school’s current population was expected to remain at or about the current enrollment for the next four years. He also referred to the work the APs do, saying they only have to “head off a few tough problems to pay for themselves.”

It was later clarified that Mr Hart was referring to saving the cost of mandated in-home tutoring for every high school student who is expelled.

Ms Jacob said the APs deal with and affect the progress of substantially fewer students than the EAs, and suggested the move to cut the assistants was “a tactic meant to enrage education supporters.” Superintendent Janet Robinson also defended the AP hiring saying the high school has needed the extra administrator “for years.”

 

Final Deliberations

Dr Robinson also told the council when “a position becomes obsolete,” because of enrollment decline, it is appropriate for that position to be eliminated. She also said given the substantial increase in disciplinary issues at the high school, the AP addition was as much about “saving kids,” on one end of the age spectrum, as the potential impact on elementary students who would be without EAs.

Mr Hart said deciding between the two was “not an easy choice,” but council Finance Committee Chair Ben Spragg said “the reduction of educational assistants isn’t going to help get the budget passed.”

Mr Fitzgerald proposed an amendment to add $300,000 back to the school request to preserve the EAs, and then on Gary Davis’ suggestion adjusted the amount to $244,000 to mirror the planned reduction.

The amendment eventually failed 11-1 with only Mr Fitzgerald supporting his own suggestion, before the original motion to accept the school board’s $732,000 reduction passed.

Before the main motion to move the overall reduction to a second referendum, Mr Davis attempted to explain an amendment that would have committed the council, in concert with the Boards of Selectmen, Education, and Finance, to begin working to achieve structural changes in future budgets.

But Chairman Jeff Capeci said it was not appropriate to tag such a far-reaching amendment on to the final motion.

Council Education Committee Chair Kathryn Fetchick said the amendment amounted to political “grandstanding,” saying Mr Davis was trying to take credit for promoting structural considerations already in progress, including a facilities needs study and a move to consolidate school and town finance, human resources, and plant management operations.

Mr Capeci convinced Mr Davis to withdraw his amendment with a promise to take up discussion on the idea at the next regular council meeting, suggesting such discussion should be put on an agenda so residents could be warned and turn out to hear or comment on the proposals.

The final vote of the evening moving the approved budget reductions to taxpayers in a planned May 17 referendum was then passed.