New Fairfeld’s notably tumultuous budget year continued with an eight-hour-long Board of Finance (BOF) meeting on Wednesday, April 26. Their official “mark-up” meeting, in which the Board makes final changes to the budget amounts did come to an end, but it was a tense meeting and the primary votes were not easily accomplished nor agreed upon unanimously. The ballots will approximately read that the BOF “recommend to a Town Meeting education expenditures totaling $51,911,168 from the General Fund and $148,575 from the Cap and Non Fund for the Fiscal Year commencing July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024.” and “recommend to a town meeting Town governmental expenditures of $13,721,500 from the General Fund, $822,070 from the Capital and Non Recurring Fund, and $3,391,605 from Other Governmental Funds for the Fiscal Year commencing July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024.”

Whether to add two advisory questions—if proposed bud gets are too low or too high—to the ballot was a sticky o ne, with some members recognizing that raising these questions may complicate and prolong the process. The questions passed and will be added to the ballots, and while some see them as a strategic way to possibly get a more fully funded budget with a “No” vote and a “too low” answer, others see them as yet another hurdle to a finalized budget that may end up being cut further. Before abstaining from the vote on the questions, Mr. Kim Hanson noted, “I do not want to see this budget fail and it really worries me that the advisory questions increase the chances that it fails.” He went on to point out, “budgets almost never go up when they’ve been turned down.” Closing public comment signaled that a “No” campaign is commencing.

With a firm line drawn in the sand at approving no more than $750,000 in education cuts, Ms. Cheryl Reedy was dismayed at the ultimate agreement for an $800,000 cut to the budget, plus $100,000 to capital. She said, “I’ve never voted no on a budget that the rest of my board supported before, it’s the first time I don’t support the budge t. I think it’s heartbreaking for our community.”

Much of the difficulty regarding the BOE budget stems from the increase that was requested following the use of federal funds for staff positions, rather than other line items. While Reedy stressed that money was saved in town with the federal funds, Hanson pointed out, “I think it was made clear to them that that was not going to be coming back and to assume that now the Town will give a normal increase in budget plus that million plus dollars that they got from the federal government, I think was a poor assumption and it was poorly handled by the Board of Education…to expect the town to make up that money, as opposed to the federal government… I don’t think it is fair to the taxpayers.”

There was agreement on the plans to fund medical and increase the amount of anticipated rev enue income. The BOF was split on the amount of debt service premium to use, as the amount to put toward this year’s budget was increased by the majority. Partial reasoning is that there may be a large increase to the Grand List next year, though some speculated that this may not be the case. The BOE noted that only six months of funding is available for a Finance position that is being added to bring the department up to speed with new systems.

Emotions ran high as the hours rolled by and Board members and Town officials became more frustrated. At one point Reedy likened ascertaining a fellow board member’s thoughts to “trying to nail jello to the wall.” First Selectman Ms. Pat Del Monaco took issue with Hanson’s suggestions for what could be cut in the Town budget to trim salaries and devote funds to other budget areas, saying, “This is personal. It has nothing to do with operating the town,” which Hanson refuted. Reedy pointed out that BOF members do not typically try to change particular line items, “it’s been the policy of this board that we would not second guess the elected officials of the town even though we might disagree with them from time to time on some of these things.”

In negotiating the cuts, there were a couple of points during the meeting in which the actual amount that will hit the residents was indicated. For example, the median property tax in New Fairfield is $7,100 per year. If a resident’s taxes go up by 1% for the year that is $71. Point being that debating between amounts that would slightly impact the budget would, in turn, slightly impact the taxpayers. On the other hand, it was noted that the tax increases compound year-over-year, plus budgets rarely go down, so holding a budget in check one year can help in future years. Reedy noted that the model she created assumes the Board of Education and the Board of Selectmen will have approximately a 4% increase every year due to a variety of factors, including inflation and contractual obligations.

Both Superintendent Dr. Ken Craw and Del Monaco walked the BOF through their potential cuts in reaction to requests at the previous budget meeting. School officials and Board of Education members spoke in favor of funding the budget as fully as possible, with Chair Mr. Dominic Cipollone stating, “we’ve made the gains. We’ve moved up in rankings across the state…we are spending the money properly. It wasn’t wasted.”

There were over 600 individual attendees on the Zoom. Hundreds of participants spoke in favor of fully funding the budget, including students, parents, staff, and town residents.

The next regular Board of Finance meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, May 17, 7:30 p.m.

By Sarah Opdahl