April 26 Referendum—

Council OKs The Budget

By John Voket

One could argue that much energy was expended without achieving the desired outcome. But nobody could ever accuse town leaders of stifling the democratic process, either.

On Wednesday evening, Legislative Council members heard from more than a dozen residents and education officials who reiterated points made time and time again during previous Boards of Selectmen and Finance meetings, as well as at the council’s own public hearing last week. The council met at the Booth Library this week to deliberate and pass the town’s 2005-2006 budget on to voters for endorsement.

After almost an hour of public comment and nearly 90 minutes of deliberation, council members voted 7-5 to pass the proposed annual budget to a town vote as it was presented to them by the Board of Finance several weeks ago. Pending receipt of the vote by the town clerk, qualified voters will be called to the polls on Tuesday, April 26, for the annual budget referendum.

Voters will be asked to accept or turn down a proposal that represents a $90 million-plus budget funding both municipal and educational operations, salaries, benefits, supplies, improvements, programs, and debt service. If the budget is approved by a majority of those taxpayers April 26, the new town budget will increase local taxes by 4.8 percent, and is expected to increase next year’s tax rate to 26.1 mills.

A mill represents one dollar in taxes for every $1,000 of assessed property value.

According to town Finance Director Ben Spragg, the recommended budget for the year ending June 30, 1996 is as follows:

Board of Selectmen (municipal) budget — $33,067,456

Board of Education budget — $56,938,770

Total Budget — $90,006,226

Revenues provided in the selectmen’s budget are expected to total $11,655,935 and the Board of Education’s revenue contribution stands at $4,274,840, leaving $74,075,451 to be raised by taxation.

Public Supported Increase

During the first hour of the session Wednesday, members of the public as well as School Superintendent Evan Pitkoff presented arguments hoping to persuade council members to restore up to $400,000 cut from the proposed education budget increase by the Board of Finance.

Town resident Keith Jacobs told the council he had been trying for several years to convince a friend to move his family to Newtown instead of moving to neighboring Monroe or Trumbull. Mr Jacobs said that until recently, he was able to make a case for Newtown based in part on the strength of the school system and especially its gifted students program.

“But today the gifted program is a shell of what it was three years ago,” he said. “And I don’t know what it’s going to be like five or ten years from now.”

Mr Jacobs then encouraged each council member to articulate their feelings about the school budget proposal individually, and for voters in attendance to note the names of council members who failed to support the school’s initiatives.

“That way you can vote for the council members who support our side on Election Day,” he concluded.

Asserting that she loved everything about Newtown, resident Tina Fiorella reminded the council of the importance of investing in the future of the schools and students.

“Quality is expensive whether it’s education or the sheets on your bed,” Ms Fiorella said. Reiterating advice she received from her grandfather, she told the panel that in the long run, even school facilities’ upkeep would be less expensive if the proper maintenance was performed today.

“If you don’t pay for quality education in taxes, you pay through the back door with fundraisers, pay-for-play, tutors, and summer school programs,” Ms Fiorella said. She also noted that if children do not get the appropriate education environment today, taxpayers would be further burdened in the future paying for additional police and other social support services once the students became adults.

Janice Paik said that as a realtor in Newtown, she was becoming increasingly worried because of the heightened interest prospective home buyers were taking in the condition of the town’s education system.

“Parents who are considering moving to Newtown are very concerned about the amount of programs being cut from the school system,” she said.

Superintendent Pitkoff told the panel that he was upset that, because of a raft of unanticipated expenses, the school district was unable to deliver to taxpayers on promises made in the 2004-2005 budget. He noted that plans to add support staff were frozen because of skyrocketing heating oil prices, special education transportation, and emergency response and cleanup costs related to a December 2004 oil spill at the Reed School.

“We have 3.5 support staff per student, compared to five per student in our [Educational Reference Group] and four per student average statewide,” Dr Pitkoff said. “[These support staff] are dealing with increasing concerns about school readiness at the kindergarten level, along with incidents of bullying issues and substance abuse in the higher grades.”

In closing, he noted that his original budget proposal to the Board of Education represented a $1.7 million cut from what buildings and supervisors were requesting, and that the school board cut his proposal by another $700,000 before the finance board cut an additional $400,000.

“In our tercentennial year, I would ask you to consider our future and the best interests of our students,” he said in asking for a restoration of funds to the school’s proposed budget increase.

Selectman Blames      State ECS

Before the council’s deliberation, which included failed amendments by Joseph Borst to restore $216,000, Francis Pennarola’s proposal to restore $400,000, and a last ditch effort by David Brown to restore $395,000, First Selectman Herbert Rosenthal made a report to the board.

In his report, he noted that according to a study by the Connecticut Coalition for Justice in Educational Funding that Newtown’s per pupil reimbursement from the state suffered most reductions of any town in the state during the previous ten years.

“Newtown is still the biggest loser in the State of Connecticut. We went from a per pupil reimbursement average of $1,094 in the 1995-96 state budget to $690 per pupil last year,” Mr Rosenthal said. “Adding for inflation that represents a 42 percent loss.”

Mr Rosenthal noted that if the town had been receiving appropriate per pupil compensation through the ECS (Educational Cost Sharing plan), a lot of the school budget concerns would be moot.

Adding to the first selectman’s comments, council finance committee chair Joseph DiCandido told audience members a renewed stipulation in the recently approved administrators’ contract was also taking money away from students and programs.

“I refer to the contract in identifying $640,000 that is in effect, an exit bonus for [qualifying retiring or departing] administrators,” he said. “When the high school principal left he got $48,000. We could use these bonuses to pay for new teachers; this money has no value for our children. If you’re looking for where you can get money, you’ve got to know where your taxes are being spent poorly.”

In the end, council members Mr Brown, Joseph Hemingway, Mr Pennarola, Michael Iassogna, and Mr Borst voted against supporting the budget proposal including the $400,000 finance board reduction. But their initiative was defeated and the budget passed by council members Mr DiCandido, Richard Recht, Peggy Baiad, Timothy Holian, chair William Rodgers, James Shpunt, and Daniel Amaral.