Budget Critics Comment At Council Hearing

By John Voket

Two of the three residents who spoke at the Legislative Council’s public hearing on the townwide budget March 28 took aim at aspects of the school district’s spending plan, suggesting further reductions may be appropriate.

But a third taxpayer asked council officials to look beyond statistical formulas that do not appear to consider the best interests of local students.

In other council action Wednesday, the council’s Finance and Administration Committee deliberated points of the town-side budget proposal before recommending areas under its review be moved to referendum as presented. Councilman Dan Amaral cast the only dissenting vote on that motion.

Several Finance Committee members took the opportunity to praise Town Finance Director Robert Tait for providing a thorough itemization of every department’s cost, revenue, and anticipated spending.

Councilman Mitchell Bolinsky even made a motion to increase the selectman’s payroll line to provide Mr Tait with a modest pay increase, before being reminded that raises for nonunion town administrators comes under the purview of the first selectman. Council Chairman Jeff Capeci reminded the committee that there were a number of worthy employees who have not received an increase this year, including First Selectman Pat Llodra, who also spent countless hours developing the town-side spending plan.

Mrs Llodra, who was present, told the committee that she is hoping to see enough revenue to provide increases for nine eligible town employees and was also looking at bringing several others she is committed to retaining up to a level of pay that is competitive with the private sector.

Finance Committee Chairman George Ferguson asked about transferring operational costs for Fairfield Hills maintenance and security into budgets of town departments now charged with handling them. And Mrs Llodra replied that the funds will shift July 1 as Fairfield Hills operations move from being privately managed to being solely under town management.

A ‘Passable’ Proposal

Before adjourning temporarily for the 7 pm public hearing, council Vice Chair Mary Ann Jacob said she believes the proposal “passable.” And Mr Ferguson thanked Mr Tait and Mrs Llodra for publishing a budget book that was “a joy to read” and a “wonderful example of transparency,” suggesting they make copies available for the public to review at the municipal center and local library.

As the public hearing commenced, Board of Finance member Richard Oparowski was the first to speak. Mr Oparowski expressed his lingering frustrations with the school district budget request, although he said he ultimately supported the overall spending plan at his level of the process.

“I had significant reservations about the budget I voted for,” he stated. “On the town-side, this is a slam-dunk. It projects that the taxpayer was considered in all aspects of this budget.”

But when it came to the school district’s proposal, Mr Oparowski said, “It just doesn’t feel right.”

He said compared to the town-side document, the district’s presentation appeared to be presented “in a piecemeal way.”

“Everybody is fine with it at a micro level, but in the aggregate it doesn’t make sense to Joe Taxpayer,” Mr Oparowski said, adding that enrollment is shrinking while costs are rising. He said according to a metric he developed, the district budget could be inflated as much as $4.4 million, although he did not expect the school board to reduce the request by that much more.

“But I didn’t expect zero either,” Mr Oparowski added, saying the $700,000 the finance board took out “should have never been in there in the first place.”

In the end, Mr Oparowski requested the council and the school board to require district officials to “find a better way for costs to be managed.”

Robert Hall was the second taxpayer to speak, saying that he also developed a formula based on public information that showed an overall student population decline of 6.4 percent since 2006, while the overall district budget increased by 23.7 percent.

“This is not very sophisticated, but even if I don’t have the exact numbers, I suggest you cut $1 million,” Mr Hall concluded.

‘Josephine Taxpayer’

Speaks

Michelle Assante was the final resident to speak, identifying herself as “Josephine Taxpayer,” and saying that she understood the district budget and the methodology used to calculate the requested increase.

“Part of the reason it looks piecemeal is because we’re going to be having a lot more differentiation — we’re looking to individualize,” she explained.

Ms Assante also justified the cost of full-day kindergarten, asking the council to consider the initial expenditure against the cost of long-term remediation for students who cannot be adequately identified for extra assistance because the current half-day program does not provide the time for that level of individual student assessment.

“I don’t think the Board of Education should be talking about cost in the strategic plan; we should be talking about children,” she said, adding that while there has been an increase in FTEs, or full-time equivalent staff, those additions are not exclusively teachers. She also asked the council to consider staff that had to be added to the district in response to state and federal mandates.

The council’s Municipal Operations Committee is set to meet Monday, April 2, with a regular meeting of the council set for April 4. If all committee recommendations are complete by that date, the council may act to move a final budget request to referendum. Mr Capeci has stated that he may reserve the opportunity to hold an additional special meeting, if required, so the budget request can be filed before the Charter-stipulated deadline of April 11.

The council is considering a budget proposal with $107,406,525 in expenditures, but requiring $107,806,525 in revenue. That $400,000 difference would be applied to the fund balance, bringing it up to 8.0 percent on July 1 2012 — one full year ahead of plan. If the proposal is passed on to voters as it was moved to the council from the finance board, it would require endorsement of a 2.34 percent tax increase.

After all adjustments were made, the finance board approved a town-side request of $27,980,942, representing a 0.43 percent increase over the current year. The school district’s request stands at $69,355,794 — a 2.04 percent increase over the current year.