Video & Public Comment: 2009 Budget Hearing
Here is the video of the 2009 Budget Hearing. There were 4 members of the public who commented, myself included. The others were Susan Kniep, John Bezzini and one honest to goodness average citizen,
Budget Hearing Intro
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M529hpNZoIE]
John Bezzini Comments
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwLPSX2mtVU]
Susan Kniep Comments
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfs9Rdj0eSU]
Susan Kniep Comments Contd.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8sN3dPVJbw]
Shelly Ranney Comments
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNj1EN3ATng]
Jon Searles Comments
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGnnW9F3x1I]
Here is the budget commentary I submitted:
East Hartford Town Council Members,
First, I’d like to commend the effort of the Mayor to bring forward a budget which doesn’t increase taxes on residents or businesses in a time when neither can afford it. This is an accomplishment I thought I would never see.
That being said I have found some immediate issues with the budget as presented. While the Mayor does indeed appear to have made a solid effort to cut back and balance the budget as honestly as possible. I have found that some maintenance items which are part of the 5 year capital improvement plan such as rolling stock replacements have not been included in the budget as presented. Failure to properly fund such items in this budget will provide no real savings to the residents of East Hartford since we will eventually need to purchase extra vehicles to make up for the deferred maintenance. This council was vocal last year about the need for constant and continuous maintenance of the town infrastructure. I believe it was Mr. Kehoe who spoke to the folly of previous councils in neglecting the maintenance of town roads causing the exorbitant repair costs we face today. This is a mistake I should hope will not be repeated.
It is my opinion that the Board of Education has failed to present a budget which adequately shoulders their share of the burden in these hard economic times. This places a disproportionate amount of the reductions on the municipal side.
I am disappointed that despite the unique opportunity and motivation that these hard economic times provide the Mayor and BoE have limited their budget reductions only to levels required to balance the budget and have failed to make meaningful reductions to the tax burdens we all feel. I hope the council will make more serious attempts to do so.
I firmly believe in the editorial advice of the Gazette’s new owner Bill Doak that one shouldn’t tear something down unless they have a plan to fix it and as such I have researched the town budgets from 1999 through 2008 as well as the 2007 and 2008 Blum Shapiro Financial Audits in hopes of identifying areas of excessive growth which may aid you in your budgetary duty. I also attempted to review the last ten years of BoE budgets but was informed by a BoE representative that no physical or electronic copies were readily available prior to 2007. This naturally leads to the question of how the BoE can prepare a budget without historical budget data.
My statistics come from the 2007 and 2008 financial audits for the Council’s convenience. I present this information as mathematical evidence free of the emotional entanglement which too often obscures budgetary issues. Nor have I given any consideration to the political popularity.
What I found is that in the period of 1998 to 2008 the size of the municipal government remained almost the same with a net growth of 5 employees. With the Mayor’s proposed elimination of 20 positions the net change is -15. The largest municipal growth item was the addition of 14 employees in the police department.
While I am not qualified to opine on the cause and effect relationship of these new positions the statistics bear mentioning that arrests are down significantly in 2008 from 1998. Whether this indicates current overstaffing or past understaffing is something for the council to determine, but it warrants a look.
I have also looked at the growth of each summary expenditure item for the ten year period of 1999 to 2008 to see if they indicate any particular arm of the government which could offer opportunities to cut back. Here are the growth rates in order of smallest to largest. These numbers can be compared to the CPI inflation rate of 27.95% for the same period.
Capital Improvements – 24.8%
Legislative – 26%
Debt Service – 28%
Boards & Commissions – 30.5%
Contingency – 33.5%
Development – 33.5%
Executive – 34.4%
Board of Education – 43.6%
Public Safety – 45.4%
Public Works – 48.2%
Parks & Rec. – 51.8%
Health & Social Services – 62.7%
Inspections & Permits – 83.1%
Finance – 114.6%
The education side of town employment shows an entirely different picture. In the period of 1998 to 2008 educational employment showed a net increase of 243 employees. During this period the school systems did experience a significant increase in enrollment, however this enrollment peaked in 2005 at 8,397 students. Despite the subsequent fall from this peak to the current enrollment level which is estimated around 7,000, which is the lowest in over 10 years, employment levels did not decline.
In 2005 the school system had a student to staff ratio of 6.98 with a student to administration ratio of 233.25, a student to teacher ratio of 13.72 and a student to non teacher/admin ratio of 15.15. Based on these ratios, 2008 employment levels and the estimated 7000 students enrolled for 2009-2010 the school system is currently overstaffed to the tune of 19 administrators, 103 teachers and 53 non teacher/administrator positions. While the BoE has already proposed cutting a number of positions for the 2009/2010 budget year there is clearly more room for reductions. Unfortunately due to the lack of BoE budget availability I was unable to identify where these excess positions are located.
It would also be prudent for the BoE to investigate savings associated with school consolidation now that enrollment has fallen so significantly.
I hope the council will give serious consideration to the information I have provided in an attempt to provide legitimate tax relief for the residents and businesses of East Hartford.
Jon Searles
Related Coverage:
http://www.journalinquirer.com/articles/2009/03/06/towns/east_hartford/doc49b00ee673682558067510.txt
No tax increase in the proposed budget!
It took me a couple of days to digest on the Mayor’s new budget proposal because, quite frankly, I’m floored by the fact that there is no tax increase in the budget. I thought for sure I’d have to go and holler about fiscal responsibility, duties to the taxpayer, etc. at the public hearing but… no.
Could it be that the Mayor gets it? Does she understand now the reality that East Hartford Taxpayers can no longer afford annual tax increases? Maybe it’s just the reality of an election year but we can hope.
My only gripe so far is that too much of the budget is balanced on the municipal side. In my opinion the schools should carry a larger portion of the cuts since it is the schools which have grown unchecked and bankrupted this town. Not forcing the BoE to go back and craft yet a leaner budget is a missed opportunity and one which may have repercussions as state legislators continue their budget work. It is a very real possibility that school funding may yet be cut.
You’ll find when you look through the Capital Improvement Plan for example that the regular annual maintenance items, such as town vehicle rotation have been eliminated. This means we aren’t really saving money. Instead we are putting off maintenance spending and ensuring a future tax increase when emergency replacements are needed.
See the chart from the proposed budget below for a quick and dirty look at how the budget is spent. Let’s see how the council handles the budget now. Will they insist that the maintenance items be restored after making a specific point about how they are necessary because previous administrations put them off during last year’s budget season? If so will they insist that the BoE cover the gap or will they raise taxes?
I have yet to go through all 240 or so pages of the budget to find the gimmick reductions but I have no doubt they are there after seeing the cuts in maintenance. Hopefully the council will address any gimmicks in a manner that both supports the town’s infrastructure and prevents extra burden on the taxpayer.
You can find the budget information here:
The town has also made the full detailed budget available this year for the first time. I provided it last year after converting it to a usable format. If you are in the mood for reviewing the entire 240 some odd pages then get it here:
Property values impacted by proposed budgets
It’s budget season again and we find ourselves in a situation considerably more dire than last cycle. Property values have throttled into full reverse and non-energy cost of living items are sky rocketing. Hyperinflation looms as the single greatest threat to the nation thanks to the knee jerk reactions of congress, the president and the clowns placed in charge of our supposedly free market economy, Paulson and Bernanke. It’s all too likely that soon the millions who have rescued what little is left of their retirements from the markets will lose the remainder’s value in an inflationary tsunami caused by an unprecedented dilution of the dollar.
Many in town are officially upside down in their properties with the general value of lower to middle end East Hartford properties dropping by about 16% in 2008 according to market information sources including Zillow and the CT Statewide MLS.
It appears that the affordability of East Hartford homes has now been entirely offset by ever increasing taxes. It should be noted that for every $72 a year that property taxes increase on a home the market value will fall $1,000. In 2008 the average homeowner saw an increase of $218 from the 08-09 budget according to the Mayor’s estimate plus new bonding costs which won’t be known until the bonds are shopped. That means the average household as defined by the Mayor’s office was handed a $3,000 decrease in property value upon budget approval on top of the uncontrollable market decline caused by the mortgage mess.
Some positives we have going for us this time around include the freeze and 5% reduction in budgets that the Mayor called for, but it’s unclear whether any such reductions will materialize. What we do know for sure at this point is that the BOE has no intention of reducing their budget by 5%. In fact they haven’t even frozen it at it’s previous level.
The BOE so far is handing down a budget with over 3 million in increases and it’s generally believed that the town could see another $5 million or more in lost state aid as a result of the state’s budget deficit. The combined $8 million dollar increase in taxpayer liability would represent a new mill rate of 34.29 based on the 08/09 grand list, an increase of 2.6 mills or about $380/year for the average household. It also represents a further decline of $5,200 in the average property value. That’s a two year total of $8,200 less that the average family would receive upon selling their home which is entirely the fault of runaway government and the citizens who won’t hold it accountable.
A State Rep. and State Senator walked into office thumbing their noses at the taxpayers by abusing public campaign funds and nobody cared. The East Hartford Taxpayers Association met and 20 citizens showed up. The Gazette reported that nobody cared. When I consider that I’ve seen the chambers fuller to protest a gas station on Silver Lane than I ever have for a tax issue I can’t help but say that I agree. It appears nobody cares.
We are given a short window of opportunity each year to express our views on taxes and the budget and it should not be squandered. If there is anyone who does care that your property values and quality of life are being eviscerated by taxation now is the time to speak up. Write a letter, tell a friend, tell your officials what you want. These tax increases are not an inconvenience of life to be accepted. They are the bearers of foreclosure, broken homes and economic stagnation and must be rejected soundly.
Board of Education 09/10 Proposed Budget
Budget Discussion, A critique.
Other than recording the event for future generations there was little reason for me to attend the Tuesday night special hearing meeting since there was no public comment period in the agenda and none of the council members moved to add one.
The democrats had a plan already in place and the republicans weren’t of a mind to offer any challenges more substantial than scolding words. There was a good hour of back and forth which begs the question why since none of the republicans were willing to go as far as putting a motion where their mouths were to actually amend the budget motion.
The most noticeable thing for me, despite Mr. Horan’s attempt to mitigate it in his commentary, was the partisanship dripping down the walls. It was clear that this was a divided and uncooperative council. The budget was not introduced as the council budget, but rather as the democratic budget. The democrats spent a considerable period patting themselves on the back for their work on the budget without even realizing that what they are saying is that they intentionally and without remorse excluded a third of the council from active budget negotiation and gave their written suggestions only a token notice.
As I said before this is not national politics playing out on CNN or with a presidential office at stake. This is our town these are our dollars and our lives, yet our elected officials are playing politics with each other without regard for our best interest. If the intention was for the majority party to exclude the minority party we never would have bothered to include minority party protection in the charter.
There were a lot of things that struck me as wrong, comedic or generally strange. I had a long drawn out review of the whole night written but in reading it I felt it was kind of pointless. You’ll either get it or you won’t when you watch it and a blow by blow from me isn’t going to change that.
All I really want to comment on other than partisan politics and the pointless response of the republicans was the following:
The democrats argued that the registrars didn’t deserve a raise, despite acknowledging that they are underpaid and work extremely hard, on account of them being elected officials who knew the salary when they ran for office and the town being unable to afford it. Then they went on to give the Mayor a raise with the argument that she works hard and deserves it. They conveniently forgot the part of their prior argument against raises that she is an elected official who knew the salary and the town can’t afford it.
Barbara Ann Rossi, Jason Rojas and Bill Horan each commented that taxes are not a significant factor in people losing their homes. They seem to conveniently forget that the average monthly tax impact is $383 per month. That’s hardly a small sum and more than enough to send a person to the poor house. Also, for Barbara specifically since she suggested the lack of tax lien foreclosures equaled a lack of tax impact, tax liens are a poor indicator of the effects of taxes on foreclosure. The mortgage companies who perform the majority of foreclosures pay the taxes if and when the owners do not so that their interests are protected and thereby prevent tax lien foreclosure while going on to foreclose on the owner who can’t afford the taxes (and therefore can’t keep the mortgage current) themselves.
The Republicans put their money where their mouths were and included a 5% reduction in their salary and a suggestion that the mayor and other councilors follow suit. Needless to say the democratic response was “that’s absurd”. So much for leading by example.
Barbara commented on the mill rate making the claim that it’s the lowest one since 1998 and representing that as some kind of landmark accomplishment of spending restraint. That made me smile since even a little common sense shows that the mill rate is attributable solely to the completion of the reval phase in. A testament to spending restraint will be keeping it where it is until 2018. Despite what the mill rate claim was supposed to prove, our tax bills will establish a new record high this year.
Almost last and hardly least, renovations for the town hall were overwhelmingly supported in the name of handicap accessibility and yet it seems most of the renovations have no such effect at all. Of all the renovations only two have that effect, a new elevator to the mayors office and a new motor for the existing elevator. The rest are purely cosmetic items. Apparently the mayor and council feel that those of us with handicaps have a lower tolerance for carpet and furniture wear than the rest of us.
As if the 118K or so for new granite curbs (that’s right, the same stuff you can’t afford for your kitchen) at the town hall weren’t enough the council voted to spend over 40K on just design for a new median on Rt 44 (which is owned and maintained by the state, read: their responsibility) and a built in promise to come back next year for about 500K to actually build the new median. Remember, we couldn’t afford the 3,500 or so that was requested for the registrars because of the state of the town and yet we somehow can afford a raise for the democratic mayor (who was smiling quite widely at the democratic defense of her raise and work dedication), luxury curbing and new medians for roads we don’t have the responsibility to maintain.
After watching the whole thing in person I must conclude that Pat Harmon, Bill Horan and Rich Kehoe were the big winners of the night. They each seemed professional amongst a back and forth that at times had little to do with East Hartford’s welfare. The most entertaining parts inevitably came from the “so what are you going to do about it” look on Rich’s face as he listened to Don’s arguments against the proposed budget motion though I fear I probably didn’t capture them on camera.
[googlevideo=http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4092096791352038550]
First rumblings of new budget appear
The Republican Town Council members have released a budget position statement to accompany their budget plan which is to be voted on tonight along with the democratic plan. Hopefully I’ll get a copy of the proposed budgets, though not likely before they are passed or defeated.
Have a read and please do come to the budget meeting tonight.
Republican Budget Statement 2008-2009
As a bit of bonus material I calculated the visible tax burden in our CL&P bills.
As a percentage of the entire bill state tax (that’s what all those fees ultimately are) come to a full 29% of the total delivery bill they are assessed against. This is our energy crisis. I use an energy aggregator as my supply provider so your tax burden may even be higher if you use cl&p.
Take a look at your bill. It’s quite enlightening and enraging at the same time.
2008-2009 Budget Public Hearing
First off. Where was everyone? 49,000 citizens and only 4 (myself included) came to represent our views as taxpayers.
The whole deal was short and sweet since nobody bothered to show up. Video is below.
I can’t help but feel that this whole budget process is exclusionary to the general public.
The Democratic council members informed me that they have already gone through the budget and decided on changes, yet wouldn’t answer a direct question on what changes were coming. The Republican council members informed me they were excluded from the budget review the Democrats conducted and as such had no voice at all in whatever changes the 2/3rds majority is going to present on Tuesday though I’m told they have some ideas of their own.
It would be nice if the council members would let us (the public) know what their changes are going to be before they vote on them. Though what incentive do they have to share when only 4 people show up at the hearing to be heard.
Can’t there be at least an illusion of non-partisan politics for something as important to real people as our town budget? This isn’t a national presidential election and we are all neighbors.
[googlevideo=http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2379006157315219581&hl=en]
Detailed budget now available.
First off, I owe a big thanks to Mike Walsh (East Hartford Finance Director) for accommodating my request for the detailed budget.
This detailed budget is pretty much a printout from the town accounting system which is now converted to PDF for accessibility. It’s not nearly as pretty as the budget book but the meat is all there.
Here is a summary of it’s use from Mr. Walsh:
The report is 222 pages long and provides the line by line detail (otherthan salary detail which is in the actual budget book) of the department
request.This document is the companion to the actual budget book and the
department number (G1100 for instance is the first department in the
budget and represents the Town Council) is in the upper left hand corner
of the report, in numerical order, which will allow you to synchronize
the detail to the actual budget book presentation.
Finally, here is the detailed budget. Give it a look before the public hearing if you have time.
How many public employees are earning more than the public they serve?
While reviewing the 2008-2009 budget I had some thoughts.
There are 468 permanent union employees in the budget. 402 or 85% of these employees are paid a wage higher than the median household income of East Hartford. I will break this out further in a future entry.
Of the 18 elected officials paid for their service according to this budget only one is paid more than the median household income. The proposed salary of $81,400 for the position of Mayor is 196% of median household income.
Of the 41 remaining employees who are comprised of appointed, hired and otherwise non-union employees 34 or 83% are paid a wage higher than the median household income. I’ll break this out in the future as well.
As mentioned over on Ladyx’s blog there are a good number of raises included in this budget. It strikes me as a bit unfair to the citizens to tax them 9-11% of their gross wages with one hand and with the other give that money to employees who are already making more than the taxpayers.
I wonder how many of the 512 town employees actually live in town. If you know feel free to comment on it.
The salary total in this budget is $29,572,701 for union and non-union employees as well as the mayor. Other elected officials are left out of this number because they receive only a small stipend. This translates to an average salary of$57,985 which is 140% of the median household income and 266% of the East Hartford per capita income. This doesn’t even begin to take into consideration any benefit packages.
