Mayor Hosts North End Budget Session

What will you ask Mayor Bill Finch tonight? The mayor hosts his next public budget presentation at 6 p.m. at the North End Library Branch, 3455 Madison Avenue. The mayor has taken his proposed budget on the road in an effort to persuade taxpayers to support $7 million more for city schools. The mayor’s spending plan, now in the hands of the City Council, calls for a 2.7 mil increase that represents roughly $500 more for the average North End homeowner.

The tax increase, says the mayor, is required to also cover millions in pension payments. The North End, like Black Rock the location last week of the mayor’s previous public budget session, is one of the highest taxed areas of the city where homeowners traditionally vote their pocketbook. Finch’s North End session comes one day after Superior Court Judge Salvatore Agati set September 4 as the election date for four Board of Education seats, per order of the Connecticut Supreme Court that reversed state takeover of city schools. The mayor’s also on a mission to convince voters that a mayoral appointed school board with more accountability is the best way to go to improve one of the lowest-performing school systems in the state.

The mayor has empaneled a Charter Revision Commission that is expected to frame a question for voters to decide in November: an elected or appointed school board?

City Council members have been saying quietly they’ll cut back the mayor’s proposed increase for schools, saying the tax hit is too high. If that happens will the mayor veto council changes?

0
Share

7 comments

  1. IT IS TIME TO DO AWAY WITH THE BUDGET & APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
    Last night I attended the B & A committee hearing that was called to go over the public facilities budget. Charlie Carroll was there with six of his deputies. The following council people were there: Curwen, DePara, Paniccia, Silva, Baker, Olson, Brannelly and McCarthy.
    After two good presentations by Gregg Dancho and John Ricci, things went to hell in a handbasket.
    Someone asked why Sherwood was doing most of the talking and Curwen piped in and said he should do the talking as he and the mayor put this budget together. Gee I always thought the department head put his/her budget together and submitted it to the mayor, How Stupid of Me!!!
    The one and only question asked was about the drop in revenue from parking freakin’ meters. It got to the point of stupid when one councilperson spoke about employing satellites to monitor parking spaces.
    There was not one question about the 18 ghost positions, not one question about where the funds came from for all the new equipment, not one question about the overall dollar amount for this public facilities budget.
    Why have these damned hearings if you on the committee are not going to do your job? SHAME ON YOU AND THE WHOLE DAMNED PROCESS.

    0
  2. We all know who is responsible for the abuse we as taxpayers are confronted with time in and time out. It is the brain-dead registered non-voters who are content to place a blind eye on all that is happening to us. They yell the loudest, of course. But they will not get off their couches and actually go to the polls to rid us of the creepy cheap-shoe politicians who are driving us to a point of absolute no return.

    85% of the electorate vote the way they are told to preserve their livelihoods, their business connections with the city and the state. 18% turn out. Only 18% of the registered voters care enough to vote. We will never win so long as those numbers are so low. We should be working now to motivate the registered non-voters to rally at the next election. We don’t have to have Mario Testa in this town. When he goes, so go Fabrizi, Timpanelli and every worthless space holder doing nothing productive to restore our town to prominence. I am utterly disgusted that Fabrizi has been promoted. I’d like to know if Fabrizi put together a set of business objective he hoped to achieve during the last fiscal year. Objectives that would improve the quality of the educational system in our city. It’s not unreasonable to expect a high-level six-figure ‘executive’ be required to put together such a plan and periodically measure the success of that plan with an orderly set of metrics. I’ll ask him … Hey John, how did you do last year? You must have done pretty well. The new guy, Vallas, himself hand picked and hand planted, practically promoted you on his first day of work. Was Mario in Vallas’ office when you were told of the promotion? BTW John, did Vallas happen to mention to you why he promoted you? Did he discuss any valid reason he could name demonstrating why you should get higher pay? Did he happen to mention, John, you might have to show up for actual work every once in a while? Cheap-shoe power dinners in Don Calamari’s kitchen don’t count. What do you say, John? Why were you promoted? Maybe when you answer that question you might also enlighten us on what motivated Testa to hire back Alanna Kagen … another beaut like you.

    0
      1. Thank you for pointing that out. I’ll try to figure out what you are trying to say. High property tax is only one of many things wrong with this city. These registered non-voters non-property owners have lots of kids that deserve a fine education, these kids need to be safe in their rented homes and their parents need a place to go to earn a decent living. The current and past calamarian-controlled administrations have failed everyone not just property owners. Besides, the property owners are collecting rents to cover the additional taxes. Taxes go up, so does the rent. Everybody is affected by this incompetence and agendized greed.

        0
  3. Andy,
    As you and I realize, when you have little time to do important work, you must focus on the big issues, the ones that can produce a change. We have witnessed B&A focusing on the miniscule and less important regularly.

    As an example, when the Airport budget was discussed, I might have asked why is the City of Bridgeport operating a facility that is physically outside the actual City, where a majority of its customers reside and work regionally (not in Bridgeport), and where Bridgeport taxpayers subsidize a losing operation to the extent of $300,000 per year? Reasonable question to me. Who benefits? Who is paying? Put on the green eyeshade!
    There may be many good reasons, but that high-level discussion was not held. There is no goal recorded for this year or the coming year to cut the operating deficit. No one is looking at that issue. A Finance Board would have the time to ask the necessary fiscal questions, to assess the data and make recommendations. This is not happening.
    They might also look at the current year where the adopted budget has had to be adjusted to decrease rental revenues by $86,000 acknowledging a poor economy. An employee position is dropped but only reduces net expenses by $9,293.

    BIG PICTURE COMPARISON: 2012 Total payroll $607,000 and Total benefits $160,908 COMPARE to 2013 Proposed Total payroll $597,898 and Total Benefits $193,596. We save $10,000 in salary but benefit costs go up nearly $33,000. Does that make sense? Salary down 2%, fringe benefits up more than 20% PLEASE EXPLAIN THE ASSUMPTIONS AND THE NUMBERS!
    Can your City Council, without better info (like 12th-month reports of all expense line items, like monthly reports showing variances from last year actual as well as variance from this year’s budget), some training in fiscal analysis they do not acknowledge necessary, and more time for their work, serve as a WATCHDOG at budget formation or at budget oversight duties??? What do taxpayers think? Time will tell.

    0
  4. I’m sure there will be plenty of dissatisfied property owners attending. Mr. Finch would be wise to wear rain gear. It wouldn’t surprise me if he’s pelted with eggs, rotten tomatoes and other expressions of disapproval.

    0
  5. No eggs, no rotten tomatoes, but a lot of property owners who are unhappy with a 7% increase in property tax this year. Chief Gaudett took most of the criticism for failure of citizen messages, calls for help, that fell on deaf ears or got lost in the cracks. Police overtime was raised as an issue but not at the level of projected overspending this year by $2.5 Million or 40% of plan. Sherwood did not claim any causes like “drug gangs, homicides or storms” nor did he offer any explanations of inside or outside OT. The statement was made that OT does not affect pension benefits, something that needs more explanation because of the common understanding.
    OPED Director Eversley talked about the various development initiatives around town. However, he was really unable to point to Finch-initiated, Eversley-developed successes that relieve the residential taxpayer, a point Jeff Kohut expanded upon with the lack of commercial success and the continuing workforce housing downtown as focus, continuing our role as a step-bedroom for County workers, that will never end the tax spiral we are in.
    Lies of the night: The Mayor keeps telling us the $10.5 Million for pensions (one has to assume he is talking about Pension Plan A because he links his comments to the Pension Obligation Bond fiasco without criticizing Stafstrom or past Mayors) is the increase for pensions. It is not. Pension Plan A funding is in the 2012 budget from Police and Fire for at least $4.5 Million as 2011 where we paid more, $5 Million. So the $10.5 Million line item is only a $6 Million increase. However relating to Police and Fire Pension issues, the Mayor in 2013 assumes all Pension Plan B Fire and Police funding disappears and that both public safety groups move to State of CT MERF. MERF in 2013 for Police and Fire shows a decrease of $2.3 Million that I believe ought to be credited to the Pension funding, so in actuality the net increase is $6 Million less $2.3 MERF saving or $3.7 Million. So $10.5 Million is not an increase, it is a gross number, and the real increase the Mayor has organized is $3.7 Million. The lie continues to be stated.
    Don Eversley made his contribution by talking about the City’s success in land sales. What dreams he has contemplated do not show up in the 2011 budget where budgeted revenues over $1 Million showed actual around $50,000. For current 2012 Sherwood budgeted the same as 2011 with similar success through mid-year and has thrown in the towel for the balance of the year by reducing revenue projections by $1 Million. Two current failing years??? Success?? Lies or just plain misunderstood??? Time will tell.

    0

Leave a Reply