Finance Board Chair Defends CIP Process, Checks And Balances

By John Voket

Board of Finance Chairman John Kortze defended both the process through which town capital projects are deliberated, and the governmental checks and balances that are in place, espousing an “if it’s not broken, don’t fix it” position. Mr Kortze, a Republican seeking reelection this fall, was responding to reports that the Legislative Council engaged in a spirited discussion about possibly having initial capital presentations by town selectmen and school officials made to a joint meeting of finance and council officials.

The idea was first posed by Gary Davis, who is seeking a second term on the Independent Party of Newtown ticket this fall. Mr Davis suggested adjusting the council’s place in the process, to position council members to advise the finance board on prioritizing proposals before that advisory panel weighs in on whether certain capital projects designated in the five-year plan are affordable under the town’s ten percent debt cap on borrowing for such projects.

During council discussion, Mr Davis’s idea was supported by fellow IPN Councilwoman Po Murray, and Paul Lundquist, a recent Democratic appointee to the council. The balance of those council representatives on hand for the discussion offered various arguments supporting the existing process, or reasons why such a full scale overhaul should be put on hold.

Mr Kortze also took issue with Ms Murray’s request to “get it in writing,” when it was confirmed that council representatives would be welcome to attend finance board CIP discussions, and ask questions relevant to the immediate proceedings. Mr Kortze said Ms Murray is in possession of both an email and a personally delivered note from him both inviting her to be interactive in the 2008-2009 CIP deliberations.

“I handed a personally written letter to Po last year during the CIP process offering to hold a meeting for her, and to convene that meeting exclusively for her to ask and have questions answered. And I extended the same courtesy to the entire council in a public email,” Mr Kortze contended. “So she already has it in writing — twice.”

Ms Murray this week acknowledged that she did receive correspondence in writing from Mr Kortze, tendering offers to meet with her to respond to her questions. But she said the personal written invitation made her “uncomfortable.”

“Mr. Kortze handed me a typed...letter after the LC budget deliberations,” Ms Murray replied. “To be frank, I thought the hand-delivered letter was unconventional, and I was not sure how to handle the information in the letter as well as his offer for me alone to meet with the six members of the BOF.  I found his offer to be a bit intimidating.” 

Ms Murray said she had met with Mr Kortze and finance board member Michael Portnoy in the past and “found it helpful.”

“I appreciated Mr. Kortze’s offer for the BOF to meet with me, however I am more concerned with the Legislative Council members who make the ultimate final fiscal decisions with the budget and the CIP, having full access to department heads earlier during the budget/CIP processes so that we can fully vet and understand the budget/CIP requests,” she explained.

The finance chairman took issue with Mr Davis’s contention that there is no place in the CIP process for council members to ask questions before the finance board’s recommendation and prioritization of the capital plan is completed.

“It’s a misrepresentation of the facts for Mr Davis to articulate there is no place in the process to ask questions,” Mr Kortze said, adding that Councilwoman Patricia Llodra hit the nail on the head when she suggested representatives have a “personal responsibility” to keep up to speed on CIP proceedings.

Ms Llodra is the Republican candidate for first selectman this year.

“They need to respect the democratic process that put them [in their elected seats],” Mr Kortze said. “You can’t say there is no venue or opportunity to ask questions. The process goes from August to January.”

Mr Kortze said the IPN representatives have a history of asking a lot of questions, but when answers are provided, there appears to be a level of suspicion about the legitimacy of the answers that spurs further questions instead of acceptance.

“It must come down to the difference between getting legitimate answers, versus liking the answers they get,” Mr Kortze said. “My guess is they just don’t like the answers.”

Mr Davis, contacted by email, maintained the position, and reiterated the comments he made during the open council session.

“Because the final decision (on the CIP) rests with the council, the council should avail itself of every opportunity to engage in the CIP process rather than be satisfied to sit as a passive observer until it is time for the council to make a decision,” he replied.

The finance chairman also thought it was a curious change in direction for the council representatives when during the last charter revision, both Mr Davis and Ms Murray, along with other IPN supporters, spoke in favor of shortening the CIP process by removing a finance board public hearing that is stipulated in the town’s constitutional document.

During charter revision hearings, a contingent of supporters also sought to remove the Board of Finance from the town’s hierarchy of elected boards, stripping the panel of statutory protections under state law and renaming the group, diminishing its powers as a permitted advisory board with certain financial powers.

Mr Kortze agreed with Ms Murray’s contention that the process can always be improved, “but it’s not as broken as she would have the public believe.”

The finance chairman said the town, including the Fairfield Hills Authority, and the school district have “tremendously talented, capable and, in the case of staff, well-compensated people in place who provide the basic information” to get capital project requests initiated. “There is oversight,” Mr Kortze added, “and it’s working pretty well.”

He said the many volunteer and paid town representatives who are “on the ground” in the formulation stages of capital proposals deserve to have more public trust than what some are given credit for.

“These people are on the front line, nobody knows better how to run a school district than [Superintendent] Janet Robinson; nobody knows how to run a police department better than Chief [Michael] Kehoe; and nobody knows how to run our public works department better than [Fred] Hurley,” Mr Kortze said. “These are trained, educated, and credentialed professionals who all have a personal and professional investment in this community. They know best. You don’t have to like them, or what they say, but they know best.”

Mr Kortze said that when it comes to receiving input from any public official, town employee, or taxpayer, the opportunity to comment candidly on capital proposals is available at many points in the process. But successful deliberations can only result when all parties on both the town and school district side of the equation participate.

“You can come up with any plan you want to, but if one board or another won’t come in to discuss it — the Board of Finance has initiated the request for dialog on numerous chances, and jumped at the chance to participate in these discussions in the past,” Mr Kortze said. “It’s not the process that needs to be improved, it’s the dialog that has to be improved.”

In the end, Mr Kortze said the CIP process is “very public, it factors in the input of all the experts, and derives its priorities from those who know best.” He added that the record speaks for itself.

“The information is there for anyone to see,” he said of the finance board’s commitment to the CIP priorities made by the selectmen and school board. “We have always done 95 percent of what is asked for, at the priority and in the timeline requested.”

Mr Kortze said the council members’ concerns and input may be a subject for discussion at an August 27 meeting, which was held after the weekly print edition of The Newtown Bee went to press.