Council Cites Divisive Influence In Rejecting Ballot Questions

By John Voket

Despite a public plea from resident Kevin Fitzgerald, and aggressive reasoning put forth by Councilwoman Po Murray, a vote to include advisory questions on the 2009 budget ballot failed by a 10-1 margin. With Ms Murray objecting and fellow IPN representative Gary Davis unreachable to log his vote by phone while traveling on business, the strongest arguments against ballot questions were voiced by council Vice Chair Francis Pennarola and Education Committee Chair Patricia Llodra.

Mr Pennarola told fellow council members he did not believe a ballot question could be phrased in such a way that it would provide any useful information to the council if the budget were to fail. Mr Pennarola said, “No useful information can be gleaned by the kind of questions we could ask.”

And Ms Llodra responded that while she would always seek to obtain the most information to gauge political decisions, she did not believe a ballot question could be phrased in such a way that it would provide influence to guide future budget actions.

Discussion and the eventual vote on ballot questions grew out of the most recent charter revision, which created legal language permitting questions to be put forth on a council endorsement. Proponents have said in recent weeks that placing a question related to why a taxpayer voted No or Yes on the budget ballot would help council members determine the reason in the event the first budget vote failed.

Ms Murray argued that in tight financial times the town is facing, the council should seek the most information it could to determine why taxpayers registered No votes. She said the town tax increase to fund the budget went from 5.6 percent in the current year to only a 0.99 percent in the 2009 proposal that will go to a referendum vote April 28.

She characterized that substantial decrease as “dangerous,” and said that the level of cuts made to achieve a near flat budget in 2009 would be difficult to restore in future years. Ms Murray added that among her constituents, there was strong support for adding a question to the ballot.

Councilman Jeff Capeci said he was afraid that installing a ballot question would give a subset of taxpayers a reason to vote No on the budget.

Without saying it directly, Mr Capeci’s comment appeared to reference advocacy among certain education supporters to vote No on the current proposal in order to force restoration of funds and a resulting tax increase if the first budget proposal failed.

This issue was a major focus of local PTA presidents who issued a letter to all Newtown parents this week urging them to vote Yes on the current proposal (see related story in this edition, and read the full text of that letter at newtownbee.com).

Councilman Joe Hemingway said as a two-time Charter Revision Commissioner who supported the option of including ballot questions, he still opposed using the measure in 2009 saying he feared it would create further division among school supporters in a declining economy.

Ms Murray reacted by asking fellow council members what they would do if the budget failed.

“Why not try to find out what voters want?” she added.

Council Chair Will Rodgers responded saying that adding an advisory question “will endanger any chance of [budget] passage.”

Council Finance Committee Chair Joseph DiCandido chimed in, saying council members “don’t have a clue” how they will react if the first budget proposal fails. But said he was certain that with or without a question, he was convinced a No vote would signal an overriding sentiment among voters to cut the budget further.

“When people defeat a budget, they know what they are doing,” Mr DiCandido said. “They want lower taxes.”

Mr Rodgers said given the limitations on how ballot questions could be phrased, “How on earth would we know now what we are going to do if it fails?”

The council chair then pointed out that every person who spoke out against including questions at the last public hearing on the budget proposal identified themselves as an education supporter or advocate.

Councilwoman Jan Brooks, a former town teacher, said she was satisfied that the current proposal presented a fair balance of town and school reductions, and virtually everyone she has spoken with regarding local economic fallout told her they know someone, or are themselves being, negatively affected.

“I wish we could find a way to raise it all, but it’s not going to work,” Ms Brooks said, adding that she believed an advisory question would “create further division.”

Ms Llodra said she would never support blocking opportunities to get more information, but it was too “risky” to experiment with such an initiative in the current economy.

Councilman John Torok, Newtown’s former school district business manger, said in his 18 years in town, he has never seen school advocates so divided, and that his biggest fear in supporting a ballot question would be “not passing [the budget] on the first go-round.”

Councilman Daniel Amaral said that if the budget fails, it would be his conclusion that taxpayers would want to see further reductions.

The motion to not include advisory questions was then put to a voice vote, with the “ayes” out voicing Ms Murray’s lone No vote.