BOE Reduction At $320K, Not 1.7M

Here's an update of the BOE 1.7M reduction:

1) it was reduced by 280k as a result of retiring personnel (60k) and lower insurance costs (220k)

2) it should be reduced by taking the 560k that the BOE wants for capital from its capital reserve fund; and

3) it was reduced last night by 640k which is 80% of the 800k savings from going back to self-insured.

So the 1.7M reduction can be down to 320k. Surely the BOE can find that amount and if it can't, Ray Jankowski certainly can! Give him the books...I'll bet he can find some voodoo accounting going on over there!

Town To Be Self-Insured, Saves $800,000

Town CFO Ray Jankowski announced last night that the Town is going back to being self-insured effective July 1, 2008, resulting in a savings of approximately $800,000.00.

The newly calculated tax increase is 3.5% instead of 4.9% and a mill rate of 22.09.

Umbarger: 'Don't Lay the Blame Entirely On BOE'

I have to take exception to several comments in your post on the proposed New Milford budget deliberations.

But first, I agree that the economic situation is ‘not good’. Actually I think the national, state and local economic conditions are the worst I have seen in my lifetime, with no ‘blue sky’ on the economic horizon. Forces are in play beyond the control of federal, state or local policy makers.

You, in draconian or theatrical fashion, mention that to close town hall, curtail all capital projects, higher town employee medical contributions should not be entertained as discussion points for budget deliberations.

I believe everything should be on the table, what’s wrong with discussing having town employees pay the increase for their health insurance (the premiums are not going to go down – there has to be a restraint on this expense). Certainly there will be resistance, but not to discuss such a significant expense borders on dereliction. Soon, very soon the unions will have to realize that this benefit should not and cannot continue as it is currently structured.

To lay the blame entirely on the BOE, as you do, is an attempt at obfuscation and/or misdirection. A quick perusal of the budget indicates there are some material benefits that could be realized by looking at the ‘Town’ side.

Why in this economic environment do we need a two person staff for economic development, which have salary expense of over $100,000? If the thesis of dire economic forecast is correct, then the Town’s support of this expense is counterintuitive. Why should we pay to entice economic activity if there is none to be had? Why not cut these positions to a .2 personnel allocation, which would allow the Town to maintain development activity commensurate with the economic forecasts (and save $80,000)? But the big one, the best piece of pork, is $7,000 for workshops/memberships/conferences for the Economic Development Supervisor and Secretary. Let’s get real – that’s a complete waste of money when ‘every dollar counts’. Sounds like we are ‘building a bridge to nowhere!’!

And what about the Candlewood Lake Authority contribution of $58,800? That’s the amount the Town pays First Light (a private equity firm, or, - hedge fund) all the while First Light wants to ‘tax’ lakefront property owners for shoreline management and recreational boaters a sticker fee to support marine enforcement, while the Town has no zoning/building/health code jurisdiction below the 440 line according to the recent Supreme Court decision. I think the Town should seriously reconsider its $58,800 ‘tax’ payment to First Light.
Isn’t it interesting that First Light has been given zoning, environmental, health, jurisdiction which supersedes the towns’ in which the lake is domiciled, but additionally has quasi-police power through the marine patrols, proposed taxing power through the boat sticker and lakefront property fees. Sure sounds like we are ceding governmental power to a ‘private equity’ firm. Jay – you’re an attorney, with the recent court decision is First Light subject to local municipal ordinances below the 440 line, and are they even subject to State Statute with the FERC (Federal) governance decision?

Lastly, about deferring the implementation of the BOE strategic plan. I would bet the same folks who are now suggesting that the BOE defer plan implementation are the same folks who several years ago criticized the BOE for not having a plan – damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

BOE Member Wellman's Proposed $743K Reduction

This is a list of the reductions to the proposed BOE Budget that were recommended by BOE Member Bill Wellman. "Most of the Administrators said that last year's Budget was good," he said. "Given the economic times we're facing, I don't see the need for these increases."

So there's no misunderstanding, here's how to read this. For example, the proposed increase in Object line 321, Instructional Programs, was $5,495.00. This is an 8.9% increase over last year's Budget.

OBJECT, TITLE, PROPOSED INCREASE $, PROPOSED INCREASE%

321, Instructional Programs, $5,495.00 , 8.9%
322, Program Improvement, $12,100.00, 22.8%
323, Pupil Services Guidance, $69,449.00, 14.9%
324, Staff Training, $47,700.00, 97.3%

432, Non-Instructional Equipment, $4,553.00, 5.3%
433, Building & Grounds, $20,110.00, 8.5%

641, Texts New, $16,764.00, 18.2%
642, Texts Repair, $32,280.00, 67.6%
647, Periodicals, $4,385.00, 18.1%

720, Buildings & Improvements, $157,200.00, 214.2%
731, New Instructional Equipment, $66,043.00, 410.0%
733, Non-Instructional Equipment, $228,346.00, 1210.0%
734, Non-Instructional Equipment, Replace $45,359.00, 256.3%

810, Dues & Fees, $33,291.00, 69.0%
TOTAL PROPOSED REDUCTION: $743,075.00

Bill's motion failed, 7-2. Only he and Julie Turk voted for it.

Some Budget Basics

Without any increases in either the School or "Town-side" Budgets, there would be a 3.2% tax increase that results from revenue losses like fees from the Town Clerk, Buildings Department and Zoning Commission. In addition, every time the Fed lowers the lending rate, the Town's interest income takes a hit.

No increases in union salaries, debt service, medical payments or road work or anything else. Everything stays flat and there'd be a 3.2% tax increase. Subtract this from the proposed 4.9% and there'd be a 1.7% tax increase.

What will happen if the voters reject 4.9%? Then very tough decisions will have to be made about where to make cuts, balancing the services that taxpayers demand against their willingness and ability to pay for them. Should Town Hall be closed 1 day a week? Should all capital projects stop? Should employees make a higher contribution to their medical insurance? No.

I think that the money should come out of the BOE Budget, not the "Town-side." I am not in favor of emasculating the Public Works Department or decreasing the level of services anywhere in Town.

Every year we hear the rants of the PTO and BOE who swear that there's no money to be cut from anywhere. Baloney. And then, to make their point, the first cuts they make are those that most affect the kids like pay-to-play. Let's see, there are how many principals? 18? And how many of them make over 100K? All of them, I think.

How many BOE and PTO members are truly qualified to manage or even comment on a budget of this magnitude? Get a group of qualified and sophisticated people together to examine the BOE Budget and demand the supporting evidence - not the hyperbole or rhetoric - the hard evidence. They'll find the scratch, believe me. Open the BOE books to Ray Jankowski, the Town's CFO. He'll find it.

"The economic climate is not good," he said at the Budget presentation last Tuesday. "Do we want to take 2.5 million dollars from undesignated?" Not really, but there doesn't seem to be a choice if we want to be able to deliver services."

"Do I want to use a million dollars from the internal service fund? Not really."

Finally, Ray cautioned the Council and Board of Finance with regard to requests for money that come before the Members. "Every dollar counts," he said. He's so right.

Don't fall for the BOE and PTO hype. Demand accountability.

Mayor's Budget Suggestions to BOE

I can't argue with any of the suggestions made by the Mayor in this FOI'd letter. My bet is that the BOE will pay little or no attention. What do you think?

Mayor's Budget; 1.76M From BOE Proposal

Here are the highlights of the Mayor's proposal that she says is "evolving:"

-1.76M reduction in BOE's proposed increase
-4.99% tax increase [correction: 4.9%]
-3.7% increase in "Town-side" Budget
-3.3% increase in BOE Budget
-2.5M from undesignated
-1M from the internal service fund aka "medical reserve"
-1 cut data entry clerk at DPW

More details to follow.

Ray Jankowski Finds 220K For BOE

So the Town's CFO, Director of Finance Ray Jankowski (the "Town Side") finds a way to reduce the BOE Budget by 220K. What else would he be able to find if he was allowed the opportunity to examine the BOE books?

Why are there two separate finance departments?

Tax Increase?

The Mayor will present her proposed Budget next Tuesday night. What increase, if any, would you support?

As Requested, the FOIC Decision