Why Advisory Questions

Are A Bad Idea

To the Editor:

The Legislative Council determined at its April 1 meeting to not include advisory questions on the budget referendum ballot. That action was not taken lightly. The merits of having or not having such questions had been individually considered for several weeks prior to our vote. There are several reasons that compelled me to vote to not include such questions this year. The legal opinion which we as council members are obligated to follow when crafting such questions makes it near impossible to obtain meaningful information from the results. I believe strongly in making data-informed decisions. However, such decisions are only as credible as the supporting data. In my opinion, the possibility of misinterpretation of data was greater than that of truly understanding the intent of the voters. This does not mean that we should completely abandon the concept of advisory questions. It does mean that we have to unravel and address the constraints so that the decision to include the questions is freer of doubt about the interpretation of their results.

A second, and more compelling, reason is the climate in which we are proposing this budget. Several weeks ago an email was broadly circulated encouraging voters to “make some noise” and send a message to the council that funds had to be restored, especially to the education side of the budget. That same message advocated the use of advisory questions as a tool to put forth the message of dissatisfaction that the budget for education is too low. Subsequent to that email distribution I received a number of communications informing me of an intention to vote No at the polls unless funds are restored. So, we have a Vote No movement combined with advocacy for advisory questions to tell the council to add funds. While I respect and support the overarching goal to increase funding, especially for education, I think these combined strategies pose a real threat to even maintaining the level of funds as proposed in this budget.

The history of council decisionmaking shows evidence that a rejected budget results in further reductions, not increases. Remember, the budget proposal rests in the hands of 12 people, eight of whom would have to vote affirmatively for any increase in spending. I have little confidence that a rejected budget will be increased. I believe there are not enough votes at the council level to support increases once a budget has been rejected at referendum.

Let’s pass this budget on the first referendum vote. Then, let us address the larger issue of how to renew our community commitment to providing a level of funds needed for our educational system to achieve excellence and for our municipal services to support a reasonable quality of life.

E. Patricia Llodra

Council, District 2

Riverside Road, Sandy Hook                                           April 3, 2009