In Budget Forum Follow-Up, Officials Respond To More Questions

By John Voket

Following the first town budget information forum, conducted Monday, May 7, several town officials who participated provided follow-up interviews to either address questions that went unasked during the one-hour event or to address concerns that came to them once the forum concluded.

The elected officials participating in the forum included First Selectman Pat Llodra, Board of Education Chair Debbie Leidlein and Vice Chair Laura Roche, Legislative Council Chairman Jeff Capeci, Vice Chair Mary Ann Jacob, Board of Finance Chairman John Kortze, and finance board Vice Chair Joe Kearney, who also provided follow-up comments.

Town Finance Director Robert Tait provided reference support.

The most significant level of follow-up came from the school board officials who responded to a number of post-forum questions, and took the opportunity to review some of the top accomplishments the board has achieved since taking office last December.

Ms Leidlein said that budget-related business came before her newly elected colleagues soon after they were seated. And those budget discussions commenced as the new school board was digging into policies and procedures its members hoped to improve or initiate to help them do a better job leading the district, and making the handling of district business more transparent and easier for taxpayers and parents to understand.

The school board chair asked taxpayers to trust that the board already has an excellent grasp of what is going on in the district, “and that we not only hear, but are listening to their concerns,” Ms Leidlein said. “We can only ask for that trust based on what we have done so far, and to ask people to be patient because that level of change takes time.”

Ms Leidlein and Ms Roche agreed that it is challenging for everyone trying to understand the complicated process that has to occur before reducing the number of classes and the related personnel, and why the district is still facing a request for increasing cost while overall student numbers are dropping.

“But we’ve already eliminated a number of positions at the elementary level,” Ms Leidlein said. “And in a few years when enrollment drops significantly at the high school, you’re really going to start seeing changes.”

At the same time, the school board and administration has to be responsive to recommendations being made by the regional accreditation agency NEASC (New England Association of Schools and Colleges), that will continue to best serve local students while maintaining adequate opportunities for teachers’ professional development.

‘No Vote’ Effect

Regarding any notion that a growing call for voting No on the budget could drive a restoration of funds to the school budget, both officials said they do not believe it will happen.

“It’s frustrating that we don’t have a mechanism to gauge the No votes,” Ms Roche said. And Ms Leidlein added that she has attended enough meetings of the finance board and council, and has talked with enough council representatives, to feel certain that if the second-round referendum fails on May 15, it will not be taken as a call to restore school funds.

“Those council members feel [a No vote is a message] that costs have to go down,” Ms Leidlein said. “The largest number of constituents who are contacting me are saying costs need to go down, and some of these represent parents who are still calling for new programs.”

Responding to questions about why the school board approved a budget request that appeared to offer opportunity for additional reductions, Ms Leidlein said in the short time the new board had to analyze and act on the request, her board asked a lot of questions and acted based on the answers they received.

“The Board of Finance was able to gain more information after the Board of Education passed our budget on to them, and those reductions were a step in the right direction [based on commodity savings],” Ms Leidlein said. “This happens every year. We proposed a budget that enabled us to keep programs and offer full-day kindergarten. I felt it was a responsible budget and as we move forward, we’ll evaluate things even more closely.

“We understand taxpayers want to keep costs down while keeping educational quality up — and Newtown still [offers] an excellent quality education. But there is nothing wrong with doing better for less,” Ms Leidlein added.

The school board officials said the newly enacted budget transfer policy will go far toward providing clarity in the ongoing financial practices of the district.

“Any transfer under $10,000 within an object code has to be reported, so we will now know it happened and we can keep an eye on it,” Ms Leidlein said. “And any transfer over $10,000 within or outside object codes has to be approved, along with the hiring of any full-time, part-time, or consulting personnel.”

Inviting Dialog

Ms Leidlein said she is proud of how fast the school board was able to embrace a practice of inviting and engaging dialogue among parents and taxpayers through a board tea and several transportation information sessions.

“We want to hear taxpayer concerns and we’re motivated to solve problems,” she said.

Ms Roche said the board has been diligent about getting all board meetings taped so taxpayers and parents can have a full record of activities and discussions by the board, even at outside venues. And the board is still working on streamlining the district website to make it easier for visitors to navigate and get the information being sought.

She said the board is continuing with its aggressive review of its own policies and procedures manual and besides its transfer policy, the board is poised to approve the first full chapter that includes review and revisions.

“We went back to a review process that was initiated two-and-a-half years ago that had stalled,” Ms Roche said.

“We want to devote enough time to be diligent, and to do it correctly,” Ms Leidlein said. “We expect to have at least another two sections finished before the next budget review begins.”

The school board officials also promoted the initiation of a schedule review committee at Reed Intermediate School that will allow for collaborative development for the staff while affording an “equity of hours for students to concentrate on key core areas, with quality rotations that will prepare them to be successful in middle school.”

Ms Roche said the committee also hopes to achieve efficiencies that protect the “balanced learning opportunities beyond core academics.”

The final accomplishment Ms Leidlein pointed out was initiating a written review of the superintendent, which will be done within a framework the superintendent has agreed to — and which includes a self-evaluation. The school board chair assured interested residents that the self-review would not be weighted above any or all other aspects of the process.

“This review will permit the board to be very open and honest, and it will provide the board with an opportunity to make decisions going forward,” Ms Leidlein said.

Llodra Follow-Up

On the town side of the budget, Mrs Llodra followed up with some historical information related to personnel, contracts, benefits, and programs.

“Over these past three budgets, five percent of the total municipal workforce has been reduced,” Mrs she said. “Positions have been eliminated in land use, the building department, public works, police department, records department, and tax office. Summer work has been reduced or eliminated in town clerk’s office and in parks and recreation.”

Also, the Parks and Recreation Department, tax office, and Public Works Department have seen personnel restructuring with positions reclassified and work consolidated.

“All bargaining units have experienced a year of zero increases. Nonunion personnel have had multiple years with zero increases. All contracts going forward have very modest wage increases, 1.75 to 1.95 percent. And no wage increases will be provided to summer parks and rec employees,” Mrs Llodra said.

She said the town continues to experience positive results with its self-funded medical insurance program, and all municipal employees have agreed to a less costly and less comprehensive medical plan and plan co-pay resulting in a cost-share increase for every employee.

To date, she said, town budget reductions have resulted in the landfill being closed one additional day, reduced pool hours, and reduced financial support for Children’s Adventure Center and for Edmond Town Hall. In addition, cleaning services have been eliminated for the emergency operations center and for the NUSAR building and shifted to town agencies.

Funding for the Fairfield Hills Authority has been reduced by $400,000 and contracted position eliminated. Fields work on the campus and contract responsibilities have been shifted to the police department and parks staff with no additional costs. And there have been reduction in the scope and scale of road and drainage work.

She also noted current deferrals of requests in the town car pool, capital equipment, communications equipment, highway projects, the recycling program, facilities improvements for police station and multipurpose building; and tree trimming and removals have been delayed and/or reduced

Mrs Llodra noted that the Board of Selectmen budget for municipal services has increased 1.1 percent over the past five years, and that the Grand List grew 0.67percent with $675,000 in new taxes — much of this growth in the commercial sector.

She also noted that the town has tax relief program in place for senior citizens, with 600 households taking advantage of the program. Two programs are also available for veterans, and currently 203 veterans participate in the local option.

“A request has been made from a resident that the town government consider a tax freeze or abatement for senior citizens who have lived in town for 20 or more years,” Mrs Llodra said. “We will evaluate that option to determine feasibility. State regulations limit the flexibility of towns in the design of tax abatements, so the first step is to assess the legality of such a proposal.” 

Capeci, Kortze Respond

Mr Capeci said he received some follow-up questions including how much the average tax bill would increase under the current budget request, which goes to voters next Tuesday, versus the original request that failed.

“The original [failed] budget would have required a homeowner who currently pays $8,000 annually in taxes to pay an additional $187,” he responded. “The revised request would have the same homeowner paying $102.”

Mr Capeci also responded to a question about why a charter revision to provide ballot questions did not occur, noting, “The previous Legislative Council formed a Charter Revision Commission to explore several budget issues including bifurcation and advisory questions. The commission did much research on the subjects… and voted in favor of adding advisory questions to the ballot but rejected bifurcation.”

He said the council agreed with the commission recommendations and put a charter amendment to referendum in March 2011.

“The charter change, in spite of winning a majority of the vote (1014 for, 261 against) did not meet the statutory minimum approval of 15 percent of electorate, so it failed.”

Mr Kortze said he thought the budget forum responded to the majority of questions he and other officials were hearing or receiving from constituents.

“I have nothing but tremendous praise for Pat [Llodra] for trying to inform and educate the taxpayers,” Mr Kortze said, adding that previous boards also did not have the ability to provide video broadcasting of many local meetings, the interactive town website, and the most recent revision to town budget reporting documentation and software, all which help make the job of communication easier.

“It’s also important to mention our commitment to the fund balance, which benefits every taxpayer, versus a short-sighted move of reducing or eliminating [the $400,00 fund balance request],” Mr Kortze said. “We acted on the warning in the last two bond rating reviews just like we told them we would, and if we don’t do it, I’m afraid we could be looked at negatively, which could end up costing us more for borrowing for as much as another 20 years.”