Budget Gets Qualified Support At Hearing

By Steve Bigham

The mood at Tuesday night’s public hearing on the proposed 2001-2002 budget was one of acceptance, although some school supporters said they would vote “yes” grudgingly at next month’s referendum. About 50 people attended the hearing.

During the hour-long hearing before the Legislative Council, many residents said they favored the proposed $72.6 million budget ($42.4 million or 58.4 percent of which will go to education) simply because they had no other choice. They voiced their displeasure with the recent cuts to the Board of Education budget and feared more money might get cut should the budget get shot down. It was clear they had taken the lead of the Board of Education, which last week gave its lukewarm approval of the budget.

Earlier this month, the council voted to cut $200,000 out of the school board’s budget even though it meant some new teaching positions would be cut, according to school officials. Members of the council were left with little choice, however. The money had to be removed in order to reduce the school board’s increase within the 7.5 percent threshold that they had set. As it now stands, the proposed budget represents a 2.3 mill increase.

Ted Ruddock of 29 Ashford Lane admitted he wasn’t sure how he would vote April 24.

“I’m troubled. By supporting the budget, I’m afraid I might be sending the wrong message – that I support this budget,” he said. “However, the alternative is less appealing.”

The alternative in this case would mean the budget would get rejected, which happened last year, and as the Superintendent of Schools has pointed out, money is not usually added to a defeated budget. It gets taken out.

Dana Brand of 32 Hi Barlow Road said he planned to support the budget because anything worse would be a “disaster.”

The cuts can not be blamed solely on the 12-member Legislative Council. Since 1996, the State of Connecticut has managed to cut nearly $2 billion in taxes, while achieving record-breaking surpluses. However, as town officials are quick to point out, Hartford’s good fortune has, in part, been built on the backs of local property owners, particularly in towns like Newtown. Since 1995, state aid for education per pupil has declined by as much as 25 percent. At the same time, Newtown’s enrollment increases are among the highest in the state.

“We need to look at alternative sources of revenue. Something has to happen at the state level and we need to stop arguing amongst ourselves,” Mr Ruddock said.

First Selectman Herb Rosenthal reported this week that some of that much-needed state funding may arrive in Newtown after all. Reports out of Hartford indicate that Newtown could receive as much as $500,000 in additional unanticipated funds, which would make everyone’s lives a little bit better.

According to Mr Rosenthal, the state may end up funding $303,000 under a proposed revenue sharing bill. Just a month ago, Newtown appeared as if it would get nothing under Gov John Rowland’s proposed budget. In addition, the town could receive an additional $60,000 in unanticipated money from the Mashantucket Pequot Funds and another $171,000 for special education (see related story).

The first selectman suggested citizens to contact their state legislators, urging them to take the burden off the local property owner.

Should those funds be handed down from state to town, speakers including Deb Hoffman, Bob Tendler, and Kathy Lombard Tuesday urged the Legislative Council to restore as much money as possible to the Board of Education budget. Council members said that if the money did come along, they would likely pass it along to the school system. However, there is no guarantee that the money will reach Newtown.

“As a taxpayer, we are almost forced to support the budget because if we don’t, we’re sending the wrong message that we think the budget is too high,” said Janice Solheim, who fears class sizes have gotten way too high.

Council members have tried to remind parents that they are not ultimately responsible for cutting teachers. That decision rests solely with the Board of Education.

Talk at the public hearing eventually turned to Fairfield Hills and there was mixed opinion as to whether the town should or should not buy the 185-acre campus. The state has offered to sell the property to the town “as is” for $5.5 million. However, there are millions of dollars worth of cleanup costs that have people worried.

Bob Meyers of 10 Mount Pleasant Road called a town purchase of the campus a “luxury,” particularly in light of the recent economic downturn. Others suggested the town refuse to buy the land until the state takes responsibility for the “mess” it created.

“I’m greatly concerned that taking this on could potentially be a disaster for the town,” noted Barry Piesner.

Dennis Dougherty favored purchase of the property, but admitted his displeasure with having to vote for the bonding of the purchase prior to the actual purchase itself. Voters will be asked to approve bonding for both Fairfield Hills and the 5/6 school in April. A June town meeting has been tentatively set to approve the projects.

“It’s uncomfortable to ask taxpayers to increase the mill rate and then vote on the projects later,” said Mr Dougherty.

Those who support the purchase of Fairfield Hills say not buying it will pave the way for a developer to come in, override local zoning laws, and put up low-cost housing. Then we’ll be faced with having to build another $40 million school, they say.

Tuesday’s meeting produced very few complaints about the proposed budget being too high, although one speaker indicated that a 2.3 mill increase may be right “on the borderline.”

A second public hearing will be held Saturday at 9 am in the middle school auditorium.