BOARD OF FINANCE
MINUTES
BUDGET WORKSHOP
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
I. Chairman Tom Harrison welcomed the Board of Education and the audience members to the Budget Workshop at 7 p.m. He explained the basic format for the workshop and indicated that if a final budget recommendation was adopted at the first workshop, there would be no need for an additional workshop session tentatively scheduled for Wednesday, April 11.
Board of Finance members present: Tom Harrison, Tom Gugliotti, Bill Hooper, Jim Speich, Catherine Durdan, and Margaret Bratton. Mike Monts was absent.
Those in attendance recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
II. OLD BUSINESS
06/07-01 – FY 07/08 Budget
a. Public Comment
David Goldsholl, 57 Old Kings Road: talked about the question of philosophy and how to get a balance between value systems and how to recognize the greatest good. He wondered how things work in the “inner circle” and what the thinking is.
Chairman Harrison answered that the decisions are resolved with difficult. There is no website to refer to for directions, guidance, etc. and that it comes down to personal and political decisions. All Town boards are elected by the voters and, as Town residents, board members are exposed to a lot of opinions. Members try to bring to the mix what is heard at the Public Hearing and to look at what is possible. The Board tries to figure out the budget number that is the “least worst” possible and also try “to do no harm”.
Mr. Gugliotti commented that the process would fail if the set of rules didn’t count interaction with individuals. The voters have a chance to say “yea” or “nay”. The Board is trying to do what it believes is the right thing but its decisions are not based on an “applause meter”. The goal is to find a budget that will pass.
Mr. Goldsholl further commented that he was referring to the grand rules and any town’s 10 year plan. He hoped that the result would be to stick to the basic target of no more than a 5% increase. Flexibility comes in with the give and take but if nothing is given up the base keeps going up.
Mr. Harrison stated that however hard this process is locally, whatever is enacted here, will stay here in Avon. If the state income tax goes up, of the $19 million Avon would be sending to Hartford, only about $2 million would come back to Avon in any form.
Margaret Glinn, 23 Tamara Circle: While we all have lots of financial stresses, I admire the people doing the planning. I thank the people who work on boards and throw my support to them.
David Magrini, 31 Brookridge Dr.: As a parent, I offer the same support. Hopefully, we can affect the budget for our kids.
Claire Henderson, 1 Keystone Circle: An increase of 3% in spending would bring the tax increase to less than 3%. Two of last evening’s speakers were concerned about senior citizens. Our position is not because we cannot afford the increase but because we have lived within our means for years. We feel certain areas are asking for too much. We’re not looking for a hand-out; we’re tired of handing out.
Joe Scatchell, 15 Thornwood Lane: I am concerned about negotiating. The arbitration laws haven’t been utilized as well as they could have been. Do we use outside council? Do we consult with other Connecticut Boards of Education? Do we even talk with Board in Canton, Simsbury or Farmington?
Board of Education Chairperson Peggy Roell answered that outside counsel is used at times. Through our attorney we get other information on other towns. Periodically the superintendents of schools will get together and some sharing takes place at CREC meetings.
Mr. Scatchell added: There is a perception that we are being played off against one another. The Town Council can, after arbitration, deny a contract. If the Town Council or voters reject a contract, pieces of it can be renegotiated. We are at a point where we don’t compete. People want to teach here; we don’t need the offered incentives. We need to take a hard look. As to arbitration, I suggest we try to give it a go.
Mr. Harrison stated that Avon is perceived as a wealthy town that can afford much when it comes to arbitration. He encouraged Mr. Scatchell to pursue the idea with the Board of Education.
Linda Merlin, 48 High Gate: asked if there had been any opinions received through email from the Town website. Mr. Schenck had received only one and Mr. Harrison had been sent about 7 emails, 5 for the Board of Education. Ms. Merlin stated that our hands are tied by laws, etc. when it comes to teachers’ salaries. She is embarrassed at this time of year for the teachers who are made to feel that they get too much. Someone should talk to why salaries are done behind closed doors.
Mark Zacchio, Town Council member (former Board of Finance member): answered that there is a good balance between give and take of the adversarial negotiating parties. If you do not go to arbitration, you can reject the results of the negotiations. If you do go to binding arbitration, it IS binding.
Superintendent of Schools Richard Kisiel: agreed that there is not a chance that parties would agree to negotiate their salaries, etc. in public.
Florence Stahl, 2 Sunset Trail: hopes that someday negotiations will be more transparent. We dither over very little because the salaries are taking every cent of increase in the Grand List. The green hand-out at the Public Hearing has the facts on salaries. Secondly, regarding us old folks, we are grateful for any alleviation. Just because there are programs in place for older people, doesn’t mean that you can just go and spend whatever you want.
Lastly, as a basis for yearly deliberations, take into account that you know what is coming. Where do we want this town to be? It can’t be more than what the traffic can bear. I think there are some things the Board of Finance can do.
Mr. Harrison suggested that after the budget season was done, perhaps in the fall, there could be a conversation with any persons interested. It would be good to raise issues and to see if we can do something about questions brought up.
Mr. Livingston, 120 Craigemore Circle: We have a meltdown; the Board of Education never comes in at 5%. Five years ago, I wrote a tax stabilization report, that no one had read, that showed towns that had no increase in the mill rate. The legacy is disappointing. We have given too much to the Board of Education. The benefits are way over those in the private sector. It seems the Boards rubber-stamp the Board of Education and don’t take things seriously. I am disturbed that the Board of Finance makes recommendations but the other Boards don’t meet it.
John Carlson, Chairman of the Town Council: stated that he had read the report and researched other towns. Make sure the facts are straight. Be careful. The Board of Finance gives guidelines. Thanks to all for having an open debate.
Board of Finance observations:
Mr. Hooper: One of the speakers at the hearing stated that he has no children in the schools but pays $7,000 in taxes on a $360,000 house. If he were to sell that house to a family with 4 children, they would then pay the $7,000 tax bill and their children would be in the Avon schools. Currently it costs over $40,000 to educate each student in Avon. The increase requested is about 4.6% per student. As it is now, the budget is not going to fly.
Mr. Gugliotti: There were many intelligent comments. It is important to a lot of people to maintain and improve the library, but it will cost money. Also, we cannot have a tax system where there is a cutoff based on age – sorry, it doesn’t work that way. Avon has one of the lowest tax rates. It is a well run town and we get a lot of value here. It’s disappointing when you don’t hear that. We can’t have all we want. We have a guideline of 4.95% tax increase but it should come down. We can do the best job possible and leave it to the voters.
Mr. Speich: He echoes Tom Gugliotti’s sentiments. Basing an increase on the increase in the Grand List would give us only $900,000 which is not enough. Every year we end up in the same place. No cost savings are looked at and there are opportunities for outsourcing here. We need to look harder and push harder at things. The Board of Education better look for $400,000 to cut next year since it is getting $400,000 to put AHS online. 4.95% is too high and 3% would be better.
Mrs. Durdan: There were 80 people in attendance last night and 12 people spoke. I do not think 4.95% will fly. I hope to keep the increase below 3%.
Mrs. Bratton: The majority of residents I have talked to have kids and are being careful of household spending this year. We need to keep the long term residents in town. Keep in mind the residents approved the AHS expansion. This year is a year we can show support by keeping things down. I propose the Board of Finance come up with no more than 2.7% increase and that there be no cuts from the Town Council until the Board of Education gets down to 5%.
Mr. Monts (as communicated by Mr. Harrison): 4.95% is too high and the increase should be only 3%. He is concerned that the Board of Education did not meet the target.
Mr. Harrison: Last night’s hearing was not too helpful regarding the budget. Emails received were mixed. I too believe 4.95% is out of whack and I am concerned that the Board of Education continues to come in too high. We’re likely to face an income tax increase. Property revaluation is to happen October 2008. We would like to see the increase number under 3%. The spending increase on the table now calls for a tax increase of 4.95%. If 3% were the number, we would need to cut $1,090,200. How do we get there from here? Every year we lean on Phil Schenck and he has put together a chart of “additions”. He believes we are likely to have additional
revenues of $650,000 from items such as revisions in grant amounts, rates in interest, the Roaring Brook School roof reimbursement, and the AHS emergency generator.
In answer to a question about the CRRA money, Mr. Schenck said there was no news yet. The amount of money is to be recaptured from the Enron situation. We should see a substantial refund or credit.
At the chalkboard, Mr. Harrison showed that the cut needed is $1,090,000 minus the added revenues of $650,000 leaving a net cut of $440,000 for the Board to come up with and that would yield a 2.98% tax increase. He proposed that $340,000 come from the Board of Education and $100,000 come from the Town Council operating or Capital Improvement budgets. Mrs. Durdan state that she thought the Board should go noticeably below 3% to the 2.7% Mrs. Bratton suggested. To go to 2.8% we would need another $90,000. John Carlson indicated that the cut would come from the operating budget rather than the capital budget. The consensus was that the additional $90,000 cut would be split $54,000 for the Board of Education and $36,000 for the Town Council. This will be $394,000 from the Board of
Education and $136,000 from the Town Council. The total budget request would be $67,034,000 with the spending reduction of $537,000. It would result in a tax increase of 2.82% which is less than last year.
There was a recess for the Town Council and the Board of Education to caucus. The workshop resumed after 40 minutes at 9:25 p.m.
John Carlson, for the Town Council, stated that they would meet the $136,000 cut by cutting $37,500 in various operating budget categories and by cutting $98,500 from road improvements in the capital improvement budget. If the Town receives state funds, it is expected that the funds in the capital budget will be restored.
Peggy Roell, for the Board of Education, stated that the Board had taken seriously the budget process. They will also meet the cut target. Mr. Harrison thanked the Board of Education and stated that while he understood, given the skill levels they have, they will be able to manage.
b. Adopt Final Recommended Budget
On a motion by Mr. Harrison, seconded by Mr. Gugliotti, it was voted:
RESOLVED: In accordance with the authority granted by the Town charter, the Board of Finance hereby moves to make the following modifications in the budget as presented at the Public Hearing on April 9th, 2007. First, we would reduce the Board of Education’s request for an increase by $394,000 leaving the new proposed budget for the Board of Education at $40,531,391. Second, we move to modify the Town Council budget and reduce the capital and/or Town Council operating budget by a total of $136,000 to reflect the split just described by the chairman of the Town Council: $37,500 from the operating budget and $98,500 from the Capital Improvement Budget. These numbers as modified are the recommended budget
and will be presented to the Town at the Town Meeting and the Referendum.
Messrs. Harrison, Gugliotti, Hooper, Speich and Mmes. Bratton and Durdan voted in favor.
On a subsidiary motion by Mr. Harrison, seconded by Mr. Speich, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Board of Finance moves to grant to the Town Manager authority to make any formatting or stylistic changes to the motion just approved to reflect any statutory or other charter requirements.
Messrs. Harrison, Gugliotti, Hooper, Speich and Mmes. Bratton and Durdan voted in favor.
On a subsidiary motion by Mr. Harrison, seconded by Mrs. Bratton:
RESOLVED: That the Board of Finance moves to accord the Town Manager discretion to make such adjustments in the numbers as may be necessary to accommodate rounding off or fitting mill rates into the appropriate number of decimal points.
Messrs. Harrison, Gugliotti, Hooper, Speich and Mmes. Bratton and Durdan voted in favor.
c. Sign call of the May 7, 2007 Town and Budget Meeting
Mr. Harrison will sign the call of the May 7, 2007 Town and Budget Meeting when it is prepared
by Mr. Schenck’s office.
III. OTHER BUSINESS - None
IV. ADJOURN
On a motion by Mr. Gugliotti, seconded by Mr. Hooper, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Board of Finance adjourn the Budget Workshop at 9:35 p.m.
Messrs. Harrison, Gugliotti, Hooper, Speich and Mmes. Bratton and Durdan voted in favor.
Respectfully submitted,
Thomas A. Gugliotti, Secretary
Attest: Susan Burdsall, Clerk
| 
