Charter Panel Considers Splitting Town

And School Budget Votes

By Steve Bigham

The Charter Revision Commission last week began its six-week look at the financial aspects of the town charter, including the budget process, the role of the finance director, and the role of a proposed board of finance.

The 12-member charter panel wasted little time in bringing up the issue of splitting the annual budget in two, asking the town to vote on the proposed Board of Education and Board of Selectmen budget, separately. There were arguments on both sides. Those who support separating the budget believe taxpayers should have the opportunity to vote on each part of the budget (town and schools) in order to express their views on the proposed level of spending. Others fear that splitting the budget may result in a polarization of the community so that people align themselves with either one camp or the other.

The charter panel, which has not reached consensus on this issue, is still checking the legality of splitting the budget. Some towns, including Ridgefield, do split their budgets.

Last week’s charter discussion on the “split vote” ran concurrently with a similar discussion on townwide voting on separate issues among members of the Legislative Council. The council is now trying to determine how best to present both the proposed construction of a 5/6 school and the purchase of Fairfield Hills to the voters. No recommendation has yet been made; however, some council members do favor packaging the two bond issues – totaling $43 million – as one question at a town meeting in June.

Some residents in letters to the editor of The Bee last week criticized that approach, noting that it would deprive them of a choice in voting for what they believe is in the best interest of the town. The council and First Selectman Herb Rosenthal have pointed out on numerous occasions that no final decision has been made at this time.

Last week, the charter panel also talked about the budget process and the role that the proposed Board of Finance would have in it. Under a plan presented by Chairman Bill Sheluck, the annual town budget would first be deliberated by the first selectman (there would be no Board of Selectmen), then it would be passed on to the Board of Finance for consideration. The Board of Finance, which could either raise or lower the budget, would then pass it on to the council, which could only make reductions before making a final recommendation. Under this plan, the first selectman could then veto the council’s recommendation. The council could then override that veto, at which time the budget would then revert back to what the Board of Finance originally submitted.

Some panel members suggested the proposed budget go to the Legislative Council first, then on to the Board of Finance for final approval.

“Those that wanted the Board of Finance at the end of the process were thinking of the traditional role of a board of finance as being the final arbiter with respect to town spending. Others thought the Board of Finance should be involved earlier in the process in order to deal with all the details of the budget to provide more efficiency, having looked at the town’s finances all year. This would allow the council to cast the final vote,” Mr Sheluck explained.

The charter panel has also considered giving the Legislative Council the authority to increase the budget by a two-thirds  vote, but not above the original budget submitted by the first selectman or Board of Education.

The charter panel also discussed a suggestion from Finance Director Ben Spragg to amend the charter so that large capital expenditures be submitted at the same time as the town’s operating budget. Currently, voters are often asked to approve debt service for a large project before actually voting on the project itself. The current town charter requires that large capital expenditures be approved at a town meeting.

In April, voters will be asked to approve $1.1 million in debt service for the bonding of the proposed 5/6 school and Fairfield Hills. In June, the town will actually vote on the two projects (see related story).

“One of the dilemmas with Fairfield Hills and the 5/6 school is people will vote on the budget with debt service, but won’t actually be approving those projects until sometime in June. There might be confusion on the part of people. Why do I have to vote again?”

The Charter Revision Commission meets every Thursday at 7:30 pm in the conference room at Town Hall South. It is slated to hold a meeting with the Legislative Council March 22.