Llodra Vows Bond Info On Future Ballots Will Offer Greater Detail

By John Voket

After learning that language on a 2008 referendum ballot reflected only the title of a bond resolution without any additional detail on spending authorized in the resolution, First Selectman Pat Llodra committed to ensuring greater transparency prevails on her watch.

Mrs Llodra responded to The Newtown Bee on December 22, following questions about wording on a 2008 budget ballot that did not stipulate some part of $1 million that was eventually approved could legally be used for demolition of a building on the site where a proposed recreation and senior center would be located.

The first selectman said it is clearly stipulated that on April 22, 2008, voters were asked to authorize appropriating and issuing $38,826,000 in bonds for “planning and construction of additions and renovations at Newtown High School...,” and a $1 million appropriation and bonding for “architectural and engineering services for the planning and design of a Park and Recreation Community/Senior Center...”

According to Mrs Llodra, both the town registrars of voters and the town clerk, who work in concert to get the budget ballots printed, appropriately took the ballot language from the titles of resolutions. Those resolutions were moved to referendum by a town meeting that occurred seven days before the April 22 budget vote.

That ballot also included a raft of charter revision questions for taxpayers to consider.

“Neither the registrars, nor the town clerk are responsible for ensuring the ballot reflected all the details embedded within the title of the resolution,” Mrs Llodra said.

The first selectman said that upon reviewing the ballot, she was nonetheless concerned about the language on it because the underlying resolution — and much of the discussion about demolition of buildings being part of the spending — may not have been evidently clear unless voters were following the project as it moved through a charter-mandated series of public meetings and presentations.

But since the resolution passed, bonding was secured and most of the $1 million has already been spent on the demolition of buildings versus on plans for a rec/senior center, all Mrs Llodra could do was look ahead with a vow to provide more thorough explanations to taxpayers on future bonding ballot initiatives.

“I am now aware of it and concerned,” she said. “Going forward, I am committed to making future ballot language more clear, and to do whatever we have to do to help voters understand the implication of resolutions, not just their titles.”

Mrs Llodra was a member of the Legislative Council in 2008, during the administration of former first selectman Joe Borst, and said that she had a clear recollection of discussions as they related to the council on the borrowing.

“We all knew funds were committed to demolition, and it was clear in both discussions going on at the time and in minutes to those meetings that the body of the resolution reflected there would be spending for demolition of buildings at Fairfield Hills,” Mrs Llodra said.

Finance Director Robert Tait said that the Newtown High School authorization should be looked at similarly, because after it was authorized by taxpayers, “substantial spending” was made from the funds that had nothing to do with the “planning and construction of additions and renovations at Newtown High School.”

He referenced additional spending that was authorized in the body of that resolution but not on the ballot for things like improving to the school’s playing fields, replacing a greenhouse, and upgrading and integrating telephone systems between the new addition and the existing building, as well as construction that occurred in the original structure that had nothing to do with the addition.

As it stands today, $289,711 of the $1 million was spent on the community center design. And while the future of a standalone community center is no more certain today than it was in 2008, Parks and Recreation Commission Chairman Ed marks told The Bee that plans that were paid for and will still be of great use no matter where the town decides to establish a community center in the future.