Thomas MacMillan Photo
Holmes failed to stop a schools spending increase.
After months scrutinizing the mayor’s proposed new city budget, aldermen voted to chip away at a planned property tax increase by leaving some city jobs vacant, reining in police overtime, and benefiting from some good news from Hartford.
As a result of those changes, the Board of Aldermen’s Finance Committee Thursday night voted to approve an amended $497,454,609 budget, down from the $503,176,179 budget proposed by Mayor John DeStefano in March.
The Finance Committee’s budget includes a property tax increase of 3.01 mills, down from the 4.43 mill increase the mayor proposed. That means someone with a home valued at $200,000 (assessed value, not market value) would see his or her tax bill go up by $604 next year instead of $886. The total mill rate would be 41.89, up from the current rate of 38.88; a $200,000 assessed value home would have an annual tax bill of $8,378.
The amended budget now goes to the full Board of Aldermen for a final vote later this month. It can still be amended by aldermen before that vote. The new budget takes effect July 1.
The changes to the budget were the result of two successful amendments: a comprehensive package of changes proposed by Hill Alderman Jorge Perez, and not hiring a chief operating officer for the finance department. Aldermen also decided not to hire a “tweeter” for the police department.
By a narrow 5 – 6 vote, the committee shot down a proposal to eliminate the school board’s requested $3 million increase.
As part of an effort to control police overtime costs, aldermen set up New Haven’s very own “sequestration.” The committee found $1.5 million in attrition staffing cuts in the police department and voted to set that money aside, to be used only if the police chief convinces aldermen it’s necessary.
Cuts, Revenue
At the outset of Thursday evening’s meeting, Perez (pictured), the president of the Board of Aldermen, unveiled an amendment package featuring a $ 5.6 million decrease in expenditures and a $2.7 million increase in revenues.
Most notable on the expenditure side is a $500,000 cut to the police overtime budget and a total of about $1 million in attrition. About half the attrition cuts come from partial funding reductions to salaries of 16 currently vacant positions in a variety of city departments. The cuts are based on when city departments plan to fill those positions; the budget wouldn’t include funding before the position is expected to be filled.
The other half of the attrition cuts come the same way, but in the fire department only.
The amendment also saves $50,594 by eliminating the proposed “tweeter” position for the police department, a second police public information officer who would be in charge of social media and grassroots communication.
Almost the entire $2.7 million increase on the revenue side comes from state aid increases since the mayor’s budget was drafted.The only exception is $50,000 in Livable City Initiative ticket collection written in by aldermen to encourage the anti-blight agency to collect on code enforcement fines.
Perez’s amendment package passed with unanimous approval.
No To COO
Mayoral candidate and East Rock Alderman Justin Elicker (pictured) later proposed eliminating a proposed new chief operating officer (COO) position for the finance department.
“My sense is this a way to skirt the residency requirement,” Elicker said. The city is currently “outsourcing” a nearly equivalent position by contracting Mike O’Neill as acting city controller. To become the official controller, O’Neill would be required by city ordinance to live in New Haven. “My understanding is that this [COO] position was created for that person not to move to New Haven,” Elicker said.
“I agree with him,” Perez said. “I have no specific proof, but I agree with him.”
Elicker’s proposal passed unanimously.
$3 Million
East Rock Alderwoman Jessica Holmes (pictured) moved an amendment to eliminate a $3 million increase to Board of Ed funding, supported by Alderman Elicker. She said the increase would tie the city to high funding for years to come, since the state requires the city to keep school funding at least as high as the previous year.
Holmes pushed back against the argument that school reform would collapse without the $3 million. The school board is getting funding for school reform from the state and federal government, she said.
“For me, this is one of the few places where we can cut a large chunk out of our budget and also see school reform supported,” Holmes said.
“It’s not just $3 million this year; it’s $3 million every year,” said Elicker, echoing Holmes’ concern about raising the minimum funding level for all future years.
Alderman Perez was prepared with a rebuttal. He distributed a sheet to the committee, showing that the Board of Ed will need to pay $4.2 million more in contractual salary increases while the state’s Educational Cost Sharing grant will remain flat funded.
The Board of Ed budget already includes a $9.5 million hole that the school system will have to fill, Perez said. The current plan is to find savings through attrition cuts to teachers and paraprofessionals, among other moves. To deepen that $9.5 million hole by another $3 million would only mean more such cuts, Perez warned.
Dixwell Alderwoman Jeanette Morrison lamented the fact that the Board of Aldermen can vote only on the Board of Ed’s bottom-line budget. It can’t mess with internal allocations or line-items. “To me that’s the problem. We can’t tell the Board of Ed what to do with the money,” she said.
“I agree with Jeanette,” said Newhallville Alderwoman Delphine Clyburn (pictured). “When they come before us, I don’t get truthfulness from them about they way they’re spending the money.”
“Just because [BOE COO] Will Clark acted like a tyrant [at a previous hearing] doesn’t change the fact that cuts will have consequences,” Perez said.
Some inconclusive back and forth with schools Superintendent Reggie Mayo followed. Mayo referred repeatedly to Perez’s one-page sheet detailing salary increases and flat funding from the state.
“This is not a good way to understand the budget,” said Elicker, holding up the sheet. He called it an oversimplification, since the Board of Ed makes all kinds of spending choices apart from the contractual salary increases.
During a hand-vote, Holmes’ proposed amendment lost 5 – 6. Voting in favor of eliminating the $3 million Board of Ed budget increase were Aldermen Morrison, Elicker, Holmes, Clyburn, and Doug Hausladen. Voting against: Al Paolillo, Perez, Evette Hamilton, Migdalia Castro, Ernie Santiago, and Andrea Jackson-Brooks.
Alderman Hausladen (pictured) immediately proposed taking the $3 million and putting it in the city’s fund balance, or rainy-day fund. That way, it would be available if the school board needed it, but it wouldn’t raise the required minimum funding in following years, he said. Only he and Holmes and Elicker voted for the motion, which failed.