Date: Fri 03-May-1996

By KAAREN VALENTA

Published: Aug 11, 1999 12:00 am

Publication: Bee

Author: KAAREN

Quick Words:

charter-budget-Rosenthal

Full Text:

Charter Panel Suggestion For Split Budget Votes

Legislative Council member Jack Rosenthal would like the town charter to be

revised to allow residents to vote separately on the municipal and school

budgets.

Although state statutes require the town to vote on one budget, Mr Rosenthal

said Newtown could follow the lead of Ridgefield which this year has split the

budget into two questions on the ballot.

"If we had two questions, and one was voted down, it would be much easier to

definitely know what to do," he said. "And if both budgets were defeated, then

we'd know the voters were dissatisfied with both. As it is, we are just

guessing now."

Mr Rosenthal made his suggestion at a meeting of the Charter Revision

Commission last week. He said the defeat, by 85 votes, of the $50.3 million

municipal/school budget in the April 23 referendum did not give the council

any clear indication of where to make cuts.

The evening after the referendum, the council met and voted to cut $700,000

from the budget - $350,000 from the road reconstruction account and $350,000

from debt service for proposed school projects. Mr Rosenthal said the $350,000

debt service reduction, combined with the $250,000 that the council had

earlier trimmed from the school board's requested budget, amounted to a

$600,000 cut in proposed school funding, far more than an 85-vote defeat

should have mandated.

Mr Rosenthal said Ridgefield also has put separate questions about spending

for large capital projects on the ballot, something Newtown might want to

consider.

Former council chairman Lyndon Thomas also addressed the Charter Revision

Commission during the public participation portion which preceded the regular

meeting. Mr Thomas said he does not recommended changing the local government

to go back to a Board of Selectmen, Board of Finance and town meeting format,

as some town officials have proposed.

Poor turnout at town meetings make this proposal inappropriate, he said.

"The Legislative Council should be at least the size it is now - 12 - but if

the commission decides to do away with the council and have a Board of

Finance, there should also be an (elected) representative town meeting (RTM).

Fairfield has a RTM composed of 50 elected members, Mr Thomas said.

Speaking later as the chairman of the Economic Development Commission, Mr

Thomas requested that the EDC remain mandated by ordinance rather than be

included in the charter. The EDC is still relatively new and is still

formulating policies and making changes, he said, and it's much simpler to

make changes to an ordinance rather than wait five to 10 years for a charter

revision.

The EDC is composed of nine members appointed by the Board of Selectmen with a

term limitation of two full terms of three years. The commission is mandated

by state statutes to determine the best use of the town's economic resources,

including alternate uses of non-residential land.

In a letter to the commission, Stephen Adams, the chairman of the Planning and

Zoning Commission, said the charter should be revised to simplify land swaps

of under one acre. He also would like P&Z to have the authority to hire legal

representation when required rather than having to go to the Board of

Selectmen and the Legislative Council for approval.

The Charter Revision Commission was scheduled to meet again on Thursday, May

2, for presentations by the Conservation Commission, the Building Appeals

Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals. This meeting will be held in the

Alexandria Room at Edmond Town Hall.

A public participation portion is included at the beginning of each meeting.

The Way We Were

Malcolm Andrew 'Andy' Bryant

Top Of The Mountain

Garden Club Spring Plant Sale Saturday

Full Slate Of May Programs Planned By Flagpole Photographers

The editorial took no position on the budget going up or down so you're reading things into the editorial that simply aren't there. The turnout is tied to the lack of passage, in that people who came out to vote last time did not this time, indicating a lack of support on their part. Perhaps it wasn't spelled out clearly enough, but that's what the editorial was driving at, people showing lack of support by not casting a vote. The editorial did address likely concerns among voters that may have led to lack of support and lack of turnout. This lower turnout also follows increasing turnout over the past four referendums in three years (meaning it is an aberration from that), and increased turnout is something that I do push for regularly in editorials. Any disappointment you might be seeing is at the break in that trend, not at whether the budget passed or not. I'd rather see more people come out and vote "no" then not vote at all.

Lower Turnout Results In Two Budget Defeats

Clearly, property owners no longer want to bear the burden of expenses while the state does not meet it’s responsibilities. Rising costs must be addressed by actions that do not include yearly increases of property owners’ taxes. The state of CT must meet its share of the educational costs, and other costs.

Town And School Budgets Fail At Referendum

This feels like an oddly misleading headline and narrative, particularly coming from the Editorial Board. The headline "Lower Turnout Results in Two Budget Defeats" pushes a misleading narrative regarding voter turnout, and then seeks to tie the outcome of the referendum to that misleading narrative. Sure, voter turn out for this year's referendum, 18%, was lower than last year's. However, last year's turnout, 25.4%, represented the highest turnout in the most recent 10 budget referendums. If you take the time to examine turnout percentages between 2017 and 2026 (2017: 19.9, 2018: 15.7, 2019: 17, 2020: 0, 2021: 8.98, 2022: 7.7, 2023: 8.8, 2024: 15.1/17.49, 2025: 25.4, 2026: 18), this year's turnout was actually the third highest in the past 10 cycles. Perhaps the headline of this article should say "Lower Voter Turnout Than Last Year", which is more accurate, rather than creating an impression that this year's turnout is some type of aberration - a narrative that the turnout numbers, in all their binary glory, simply do not support. Further, the headline of this article appears to tie the "lower turnout" to the defeated budgets. Sure, that could be true. But, perhaps, its more likely that Newtown residents are feeling the squeeze of multiple economic influences. In Newtown, we've experienced property revaluations and increased municipal spending. Eversource continues to raise rates. The state legislature gives PURA the authority to impose Public Benefit charges that benefit a tiny percentage of the public (and subsequently burdening the rest of us). At the national level, inflation has run rampant for years and many of those costs remain high to this day. In short, the data tells a far less dramatic—and far more honest—story than the headline suggests. This wasn’t an electorate vanishing in apathy; it was a fairly typical turnout delivering an verdict that, perhaps, some at the Editorial Board didn't like. At some point, it’s worth considering that residents aren’t confused, disengaged, or misled by turnout; they’re simply doing math at their kitchen tables and concluding that “no” is the only responsible answer left.

Enjoyed the forum which only confirmed my support for Brandon Moore as the Democratic candidate to run for the state representative position. Brandon Moore did not waiver about his duty to all the people, if elected, when an issue presents itself that requires that he voice a difference of opinion for the wellbeing of Newtown residents. If Michelle Ku’s 16 years have led to her loyalty being to other elected officials, as she implied, then Newtown is going to continue to witness actions that do not protect its residents. She could not unseat republican, Mitch Bolinsky, during a Blue Wave, and once again, will not do it now. Winning that seat is critical for all. That explains why her previous campaign committee now campaigns for Brandon Moore. It explains all the endorsements he has received from local elected democratic officials. It’s why we need Brandon Moore to be the democratic candidate to run for state representative.

Second Newtown DTC, League Of Women Voters Candidates Event Planned

Appreciated the opportunity to hear from both candidates as we were present for the College Dems forum but only heard from Brandon Moore. It was an opportunity to see who can unseat the Republican incumbent and there is no doubt that Brandon Moore should be the Democratic candidate. One concerned parent posed a question about discrimination unaddressed by the school district and interestingly enough, Michelle Ku, who proudly speaks of her Board membership years, said little, while Brandon Moore passionately addressed the issue along with his experience as an Apache Helicopter Commander. This family is supporting Brandon Moore. We need change and someone who is not afraid to disagree, especially about the rising costs of living in Newtown.

Log In

Date: Fri 03-May-1996

Leave a Reply Cancel reply