The Charter Revision Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, September 29, 2006 in the Mary Hawley Room, 45 Main Street, Newtown, CT. Chairman Al Cramer called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
PRESENT: Al Cramer, Carolyn Signorelli, Joan Plouffe, LeReine Frampton, Guy Howard ABSENT: Joseph Hemingway
ALSO PRESENT: Board of Education Chairman Elaine McClure, Board of Education members Lisa Schwartz and Andrew Buzzi, Schools Superintendent Dr. Evan Pitkoff, Schools Business Manager Ron Bienkowski, one member of public, one member of press
ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES: Upon motion by Ms. Signorelli, the minutes of the 8/22/06 meeting were unanimously accepted as presented.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None noted at this time.
BOARD OF EDUCATION: Board of Education Vice Chairman Lisa Schwartz asked to speak first as she had to leave the meeting. Regarding bifurcating the budget vote, she is not sure that would be in the best interest of the town because it would imply that there is a distinction between the schools and the town. She also feels that the Town Meeting should be eliminated as it is “primitive” for a town of our size. She does see a benefit to having seven members on the Board of Education because of the possibility of tie votes. If the number of members is increased, she would endorse having an “unaffiliated” position. She feels strongly that there should be an easier way for unaffiliated residents to seek elected positions. She feels that the CIP (Five Year
Capital Improvement Plan) “seems to be driving every fiscal decision in town”. It never had the level of importance it has now. She feels the Charter should include information about how capital projects are approved. The Legislative Council should serve “at large”. She does not understand why this is done by district. She also believes the Council and Board of Finance should have unaffiliated seats.
Chairman Cramer asked the Board of Education to consider a recommendation made by Finance Director Ben Spragg that when the budget is submitted by the Board of Education and Board of Selectmen, it include revenue, operating budget and capital expenditures. This would be the only time to request capital items and they would be approved for funding at the budget referendum. This would eliminate many of the Town Meetings during the year for special appropriations. Mr. Buzzi feels that would be difficult. The Board of Ed just spent 7 months discussing a specific project – the high school expansion. Now, the Finance Chairman wants to have more people come before them to give more information before the project is included in the CIP. (Mr. Bienkowski arrived at this time). Mr. Buzzi feels the Board of Education should present its projects to an “appropriations board”. Then, they would take that project and look at how it fits in the plan. At that point, people will have
the opportunity to talk about the fiscal ramification. Currently, there is a four step approach – Board of Education, Board of Finance, Council Finance Subcommittee and Legislative Council. He feels it should be only two steps and that the Board of Finance function should be within the Council. Mr. Cramer asked about changing to two budget referendums and then, if necessary, the Council would have the final vote. Mr. Buzzi would support that.
Regarding changing the number of members on the Board of Education, Ms. McClure advised that the majority of the board feels it should stay at the current number of six. Regarding the budget, she advised that they begin putting it together in October and the Board of Education finishes in January. On major line item each year is the health insurance. They have to provide costs with only 4-6 months experience. If they also had to have capital projects ready by January, it would be very difficult.
Regarding capital school projects, Mr. Bienkowski explained that there are new procedures for state reimbursement. The State now will not make a grant commitment until they know that the town is serious. There is no commitment until a referendum or Town Meeting has approved the funding for a project. The way the town handles these projects, is to hire an architect, put the project out to bid and present the bottom line number to a referendum/town meeting vote. This is a lengthy process. Mr. Bienkowski agrees with funding capital projects at budget time but there would need to be a mechanism in place to handle the event of bids coming in higher than the budget. Mr. Bienkowski feels there should be a section that deals with priority school
facility projects that have different requirements than other CIP projects due to a different process for school project funding.
Dr. Pitkoff advised that due to the length of the budget process (October – April), he misses out on the best recruiting time for school staff. The process needs to be shortened.
Regarding four year terms, Dr. Pitkoff feels that there is a steep learning curve to the intricacies of a school system. It takes a couple of years to get a handle on being a good Board of Education member. Four years gives you time to get a better understanding.
Ms. McClure stated that the Board of Finance will decide the CIP before the high school project goes to a vote. Whatever amount they decide for this project in the CIP “is the project”. Mr. Buzzi added that the Board of Finance will say that the CIP is a “planning tool”, however, recent projects show that they “take the CIP as hard numbers”.
Ms. Plouffe asked about the Public Building & Site Commission. Ms. McClure stated that they are essential to the Board of Education, whose members do not have the expertise for building projects.
The Board of Education members and Schools Superintendent and Business Manager were thanked for attending.
NEXT MEETING: The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, September 5, 2006 and Board of Finance Chairman John Kortze is invited.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Mr. Robert Merola, 22 Ashford Lane, attends many of the budget meetings, including Board of Education, Board of Finance and Legislative Council. He feels that “Public Participation” should be called “Public Comment” because participation is not allowed. He feels it should be allowed at the beginning of each meeting and again at the end, and should not be limited to items on the agenda. He feels that the Board of Finance is important and would agree with getting rid of the Finance Subcommittee of the Legislative Council. Board of Finance members have financial experience and as a taxpayer, he likes that.
Having no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Jan Andras
Clerk Pro Tem
| 
