At a virtual meeting of the Board of Finance on March 30, the Board received what it has been hoping to receive for the last several years—commentary from the public on the proposed municipal and education budgets. Various members of the public spoke for over an hour in both public comment portions of the meeting in support of the budgets as proposed. They were also critical of comments made by some Board members at the previous BoF meeting that stated New Fairfield students ranked at or close to the bottom of their peer group.
In previous years, public comment at BoF meetings during budget season has been minimal, as has voter turnout when the budgets have been voted upon. Board members in the past had often lamented this fact and the Board as a whole has looked at ways to generate public interest and input in the process. This year, they are receiving a great deal of feedback, and the hope is this will improve voter turnout when the budgets are brought up for a vote in late April or early March.
Most of the comments from the public expressed a desire for the proposed budgets to be approved and brought to the public for a vote “as is”. Others took issue with comments made by several new Board members that the town is not getting a big enough “bang for its buck” when it comes to education spending. Some speakers disputed the validity of Niche.com, which was cited by Board Alternate David Coleman as a source. They pointed the Board to EdSite, which they said uses the CT Dept. of Education’s own data.
Tom Kowalchik of USI gave the Board an update of the status of the town’s medical insurance fund. He noted that in comparing the October 2021 to January 2022 claims to the same period the previous year, there was a spike in claims. The majority of those claims were for surgeries and procedures that had been put off during the height of the pandemic. The figures from the same period a year ago were significantly less. This, he said, led him to believe that the increased claims from October to January were an abnormality and not a trend. He indicated that based on this and the preliminary claims numbers for the first few weeks of March, and increased drug rebates, he expects the claims amount budgeted by the Board to be roughly on track with his projections. This was better news than the previous week when USI’s estimate was several hundred thousand dollars more than the Board’s budgeted amount.
Discussion then centered on the proposed municipal and education budgets and the size of an increase or decrease. Board Member Cheryl Reedy restated her position from the previous meeting, saying she felt using $1.2 million of the bonding premium and cutting $50,000 from the municipal and $150,000 from the education budgets as being fair. That would represent an overall tax increase of 3.3%. This, she noted, would represent only an additional .2% increase in the mil rate on top of the 3.1% debt service increase.
Board Member Thora Perkins suggested cutting $25,000 from the municipal budget and $375,000 from the education budget, while using $1.2 of the bonding premium. This, according to Town Director of Finance Olga Melnikov, would result in a tax increase of 2.92%.
Board Member Mark Beninson asked for more information on a potential problem with reimbursement from the state on part of the Meeting House Hill/Consolidated School project and how that might impact the budget.
Director of Business & Operations Dr. Richard Sanzo said there would be no impact on the coming fiscal year’s budget. He went on to say that the district was notified by the state that a portion of the work being done within Meeting House Hill School would not be eligible for state reimbursement under current legislation. Dr. Sanzo said that the district has been working with local state and New Fairfield elected officials on a draft of new legislation to be included in a school construction bill to be put forth at the next legislative session. He said the bill would correct the problem and make that particular piece of the Consolidated Learning Academy project eligible for reimbursement. The estimated amount of reimbursement at stake is roughly $400,000.
Both Mr. Beninson and Dr. Sanzo clarified that the only part of state reimbursement in question was related to the join between the new learning academy and MHHS. The rest of the Consolidated project and the entirety of the high school building project are eligible for partial reimbursement from the state.
When asked to describe what $375,000 in cuts to the education budget might look like, Superintendent of Schools Dr. Pat Cosentino said that most likely, cuts would have to be made to teachers and staff. The result of that, she said, would be larger class sizes. She mentioned the STRINGS and gifted programs as other items that might have to be cut.
Dr. Sanzo noted that some additional costs have come up since the budget had been crafted that are not accounted for. He mentioned greater than anticipated costs such as students attending the MOAG program in Region 12 ($28,000 more), and unpredictable energy and utility costs.
The next Board of Finance meeting will be Wednesday, April 6 at 7:30 pm.
By Greg Slomba