Well, it's apparent that there aren't many ideas surrounding the City budget. OK, time to unleash the hounds regarding solid ideas in reducing the BOE budget. Remember, keep it clean. It's about the kids....While the City Council has no control over the line items the Board budgets, the bottom line is decided there. If the ideas are viable, I'll make sure the BOE hears about them. The Finance Committee, too.
Friday, March 31, 2006
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
Budget Cutting
"No government can exist without taxation. This money must necessarily be levied on the people; and the grand art consists of levying so as not to oppress.''
Frederick the Great
The Finance Committee is starting to tred through the City Manager's budget, and the BOE gave their presentation last week. Over the next several weeks, other large departments (e.g., police/fire, public works and parks&rec) will also undergo the Committee's scrutiny.
I read the letters to the editor of the RJ, and hear from people on the street that we need to cut spending. I'd like to hear the ideas of where the City could cut. What services, what positions can be eliminated without affecting the City's quality of life. For the time being, let's leave the BOE's budget as a separate discussion. I know it's a big target, but for discussion's purposes, let's focus on the City's expensed for now. Try to be as specific and constructive as possible. Broadbrushed statements like "Cut everything by 10%" isn't realistic. I really would like to read proposals I can bring before the Committee for serious review and consideration. Suggest away...
Frederick the Great
The Finance Committee is starting to tred through the City Manager's budget, and the BOE gave their presentation last week. Over the next several weeks, other large departments (e.g., police/fire, public works and parks&rec) will also undergo the Committee's scrutiny.
I read the letters to the editor of the RJ, and hear from people on the street that we need to cut spending. I'd like to hear the ideas of where the City could cut. What services, what positions can be eliminated without affecting the City's quality of life. For the time being, let's leave the BOE's budget as a separate discussion. I know it's a big target, but for discussion's purposes, let's focus on the City's expensed for now. Try to be as specific and constructive as possible. Broadbrushed statements like "Cut everything by 10%" isn't realistic. I really would like to read proposals I can bring before the Committee for serious review and consideration. Suggest away...
Friday, March 24, 2006
Sports Complex 3/23
Last night's Finance meeting was a 4 1/2 hour affair where the main topic was kids. For the first hour, the Committee listened to the Board of Ed's presentation on their $96 million request for funds to teach Meriden's children. That's a lot of money for readin', writin', and 'rithmetic, but the schools of today are charged with so much more that the days of the one-room school. The committee grilled the BOE (which crafted their budget this year as a committee of the whole) on several line items that showed significant increases over last year. We were also advised that unexpected cuts from the Federal government in key grants, as well as uncertainty over the final state grant through ECS, already has the Board preparing for program cuts that will not please parents. No Child Left Behind was also discussed, especially as to its impact on the budget. No one disagreed with NCLB's main premise, but the lack of funding by the Feds to support the required (and detested) testing requires taking money from other critical educational line items. Tuitions for students who go out of District (this includes Edison Middle School, vo-ag students, and approximately 140+ with unique special education requirements that cannot be provided in the City) topped $10 million. A brief dialogue on the perennial BOE vehicles took place, with the Mayor and Board President Frank Kogut agreeing to sit together for a more detailed talk. The City Manager's budget cuts the BOE's request to $94+ million. The Finance Committee will work this number even more.
The next major agenda item was the proposed Falcon Field turfed complex. Representatives from Wethersfield High and Central CT State University, both institutions with turfed fields, gave an overview of how the fields are constructed, maintained, and what they've done for their respective programs. Again, from my perspective the financial analysis, as well as parking, traffic and neighborhoo impact, was of most interest. I've asked the Finance Director to prepare a more detailed pro forma for the Council to see before it votes on the Committee report. The annual cost to the City will be approximately $120,000 over the next 15 years, plus maintenance, where there will be significant savings against today's program. The committee unanimously approved the project with an amendment I proposed: that this project would be applied against the City's self-imposed bonding cap, regardless if we could exempt it according to state guidelines. This means that the City Council will have to make harder choices on other spending priorities that are generally bonded (street paving, sidewalks, equipment purchases, building maintainance, etc). Nevertheless, the proposal since it was first introduced as a function the state grant procured by Senator Gaffey has undergone a tremendous amount of research, scrutiny and debate. I imagine some people will be surprised by Brian Kogut's and my vote in favor, but our concerns were met.
Our final item was the Capital Improvement Plan, where we earmarked $20,000 to provide seed money for the Hubbard Park Playscape Committee, who are raising funds to provide a new, safer, and handicap-accessible playscape in our jewel park.
This was a long post, but it was a long meeting. Over $98 million on the table considered for Meriden's kids. You can't say we don't care.
The next major agenda item was the proposed Falcon Field turfed complex. Representatives from Wethersfield High and Central CT State University, both institutions with turfed fields, gave an overview of how the fields are constructed, maintained, and what they've done for their respective programs. Again, from my perspective the financial analysis, as well as parking, traffic and neighborhoo impact, was of most interest. I've asked the Finance Director to prepare a more detailed pro forma for the Council to see before it votes on the Committee report. The annual cost to the City will be approximately $120,000 over the next 15 years, plus maintenance, where there will be significant savings against today's program. The committee unanimously approved the project with an amendment I proposed: that this project would be applied against the City's self-imposed bonding cap, regardless if we could exempt it according to state guidelines. This means that the City Council will have to make harder choices on other spending priorities that are generally bonded (street paving, sidewalks, equipment purchases, building maintainance, etc). Nevertheless, the proposal since it was first introduced as a function the state grant procured by Senator Gaffey has undergone a tremendous amount of research, scrutiny and debate. I imagine some people will be surprised by Brian Kogut's and my vote in favor, but our concerns were met.
Our final item was the Capital Improvement Plan, where we earmarked $20,000 to provide seed money for the Hubbard Park Playscape Committee, who are raising funds to provide a new, safer, and handicap-accessible playscape in our jewel park.
This was a long post, but it was a long meeting. Over $98 million on the table considered for Meriden's kids. You can't say we don't care.
Tuesday, March 21, 2006
More on Meriden Planning
This afternoon the third meeting of the committee working on the updating of the City's Plan of Conservation and Development (aka "Master Plan") took place. Two major items were on the agenda: the first was agreeing on a vision statement which, after review from last meeting's input by the members and some discussion on the desired residential population growth over the next 20 years, was accepted. As soon as I get the final draft from planning staff, I will post here. The second was an extremely interesting and informative presentation from C. James Gibbons, a UConn professor at the Center for Land Use Education and Research (CLEAR). (A good use of our state tax dollars...no charge for this presentation and Jim's formidable knowledge. Factoid: he's a Meriden native!). The committee arranged to have his presentation videotaped for public viewing on the cable access channel. I urge you to watch it. Jim gave a great overview on what the planning process should consider, including the statutory requirements that all towns and cities are under to meet. One point he kept returning to was that public input is critical. Another was that the local officials, not the consultant, should be prepared to educate the public on the plan as it evolves. Be assured that both these elements will be adhered to in the process.
Jim also shared some of the work CLEAR is doing, and pointed us to their website, www.clear.uconn.edu. One particularly interesting slide dealt with land cover. For instance, it shows that since 1985, with all the development that took place through 2002, 25% of Meriden is still forested. Granted, it's a drop from 28% 20 years ago, but it's illuminating. It points to the type of resource information the City must catalog and understand before we finalize our Master Plan.
The next step is to hire a consultant that will help guide the committee in its work. This is planned by May. The whole process will take 1 to 2 years, but I think Meriden is well on its way. For more information, please contact the City Planner, Dominick Caruso at City Hall. His number is 630-4081. And watch the presentation by Jim Gibbons if you get a chance.
Jim also shared some of the work CLEAR is doing, and pointed us to their website, www.clear.uconn.edu. One particularly interesting slide dealt with land cover. For instance, it shows that since 1985, with all the development that took place through 2002, 25% of Meriden is still forested. Granted, it's a drop from 28% 20 years ago, but it's illuminating. It points to the type of resource information the City must catalog and understand before we finalize our Master Plan.
The next step is to hire a consultant that will help guide the committee in its work. This is planned by May. The whole process will take 1 to 2 years, but I think Meriden is well on its way. For more information, please contact the City Planner, Dominick Caruso at City Hall. His number is 630-4081. And watch the presentation by Jim Gibbons if you get a chance.
Monday, March 20, 2006
Meriden Planning
There's been an interesting discussion thread developing in the Comments to the "State Tax Cuts" post from a couple weeks ago. A couple posters have given opinions on how planning for economic development has been less than desirable in the recent, and not so recent past. This is an important topic, as the City must do a better job in attracting and retaining businesses in order to expand the tax base and reduce pressure on current commercial and residential property taxpayers. While we all await for true property tax reform (whatever that means!), we must be more strategic about using the resources we have at hand. That means land, (whether developable or re-developable), labor, incentives, and most important, leadership.
There has been some long-term planning to overcome obstacles to economic development, most visibly in flood control and downtown revitalization (CIty Center Initiative). A significant effort is currently under way under the auspices of the Planning Commission, which is updating the City's Master Plan of Conservation and Development. Chairman Rico Bucilli is directing a committee made up of representatives from the City Council (myself and Brian Kogut), the Planning Commission, the Zoning Board of Appeals, the Conservation Commission, Inlands and Wetlands Commissions among others. They meet monthly (next meeting, tomorrow, 3/21) and will over the next year prepare an updated plan to guide the City's development into the 21st century. There will be ample opportunity for the public's review and input. I will do my best to update you here, but feel free to attend the meetings, which are public.
What would be your priorities as this plan evolves?
There has been some long-term planning to overcome obstacles to economic development, most visibly in flood control and downtown revitalization (CIty Center Initiative). A significant effort is currently under way under the auspices of the Planning Commission, which is updating the City's Master Plan of Conservation and Development. Chairman Rico Bucilli is directing a committee made up of representatives from the City Council (myself and Brian Kogut), the Planning Commission, the Zoning Board of Appeals, the Conservation Commission, Inlands and Wetlands Commissions among others. They meet monthly (next meeting, tomorrow, 3/21) and will over the next year prepare an updated plan to guide the City's development into the 21st century. There will be ample opportunity for the public's review and input. I will do my best to update you here, but feel free to attend the meetings, which are public.
What would be your priorities as this plan evolves?
Monday, March 13, 2006
Public Hearing: Sports Complex 3/13
The public hearing called by Public Works and Parks and Rec Committee Chairman Councilor Mike Rohde was held this evening at Washington Middle School. Nine city councilors listened to over 60 people express their opinions on the proposal, virtually all in favor, with many more supporting through applause and cheers. Only one speaker, who noted that dissent is what makes America strong, gave a quiet but well-measured response as to why he was opposed, and felt money should go to higher educational priorities which benefit more children in the long run. Two others, Arlene Dunlop and Andy Piatek, regular critics of Council spending at Council public comment sessions, were surprisingly non-committal on the idea, although borderline opposed. I was clearly expecting more opposition from them.
I was impressed by the respect of the public for all speakers, however. Even though the room was mostly filled with supporters, they listened quietly and applauded politely when the lone dissenter spoke, as well as when Arlene and Andy finished. It made me proud of our citizens, and was a far cry from some involved in the debate on the proposed zone regulation change around the Saab Scania site last year, who catcalled and yelled over recognized speakers who opposed their position against the zone regulation change. And while I wished there were more to be heard from those with concerns on the sports complex, because it helps decision-making when you hear all sides, I congratulate the organizers of the presentations tonight. People did their homework, and a lot of the youth (mostly Platt football players, but some younger ones as well) got their first taste of public speaking, and I hope they see what it takes to get involved in their community. (The cheers for the young Meriden Raiders were the loudest!) As we hear time and again, they are our future.
I was interested in the two proposals around the funding side of this issue, which is very important to me. Former mayor Joe Marinan suggested dedicating part of the annual Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) which the City authorized each year to the tune of about $7.5 million on average. He said we should work within this spending pool, but buy less dump trucks or other priorities funded with this money (for example, building upgrades and maintenance, street and sidewalk repair are often funded within the CIP). Jim Fredericks calculated that it would only cost pennies a day for annual principal and interest payments assessed to the 17,786 taxable properties (not including commercial) in the City. That may be true, but when added to the pennies a day for everything else that makes up our $175 million annual budget, those pennies can break a bank. But it was a creative way of overcoming the objection regarding cost. (And by the way, Jim, I caught the West Point reference.) Andy Piatek suggested soliciting 1,000 citizens for $1,000 a piece, and offer a tax break in return. Not sure that's workable, but again, it was nice to see a few people thinking about the cost issue.
The hearing concluded after nearly 3 hours, with the Public Works committee going into session. I left at that point, as I will be awaiting their recommendation to the full Council before it comes to Finance, which will have to consider the cost issue in earnest if the Council supports the project. As a few speakers noted, it is not an easy decision to make, but we're elected to make it. The public hearing was successful in that it gave the public an open opportunity to tell its representatives what they wanted. Tonight they clearly wanted a sports complex. We will need to decide soon because of the deadline for the grant. We will decide, soon.
I was impressed by the respect of the public for all speakers, however. Even though the room was mostly filled with supporters, they listened quietly and applauded politely when the lone dissenter spoke, as well as when Arlene and Andy finished. It made me proud of our citizens, and was a far cry from some involved in the debate on the proposed zone regulation change around the Saab Scania site last year, who catcalled and yelled over recognized speakers who opposed their position against the zone regulation change. And while I wished there were more to be heard from those with concerns on the sports complex, because it helps decision-making when you hear all sides, I congratulate the organizers of the presentations tonight. People did their homework, and a lot of the youth (mostly Platt football players, but some younger ones as well) got their first taste of public speaking, and I hope they see what it takes to get involved in their community. (The cheers for the young Meriden Raiders were the loudest!) As we hear time and again, they are our future.
I was interested in the two proposals around the funding side of this issue, which is very important to me. Former mayor Joe Marinan suggested dedicating part of the annual Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) which the City authorized each year to the tune of about $7.5 million on average. He said we should work within this spending pool, but buy less dump trucks or other priorities funded with this money (for example, building upgrades and maintenance, street and sidewalk repair are often funded within the CIP). Jim Fredericks calculated that it would only cost pennies a day for annual principal and interest payments assessed to the 17,786 taxable properties (not including commercial) in the City. That may be true, but when added to the pennies a day for everything else that makes up our $175 million annual budget, those pennies can break a bank. But it was a creative way of overcoming the objection regarding cost. (And by the way, Jim, I caught the West Point reference.) Andy Piatek suggested soliciting 1,000 citizens for $1,000 a piece, and offer a tax break in return. Not sure that's workable, but again, it was nice to see a few people thinking about the cost issue.
The hearing concluded after nearly 3 hours, with the Public Works committee going into session. I left at that point, as I will be awaiting their recommendation to the full Council before it comes to Finance, which will have to consider the cost issue in earnest if the Council supports the project. As a few speakers noted, it is not an easy decision to make, but we're elected to make it. The public hearing was successful in that it gave the public an open opportunity to tell its representatives what they wanted. Tonight they clearly wanted a sports complex. We will need to decide soon because of the deadline for the grant. We will decide, soon.
Sunday, March 12, 2006
Non Profits and You
During our last council meeting we were faced with two resolutions to provide additional funding to the Meriden Raiders and Salvation Army. There was quite a debate. Contrary to some opinions, we don't settle these things in caucus. The discussion revolved around whether we should provide non-profit agencies additional funding after they have received monies through CDBG grants (this is money we recieve from the Feds). I am interested in your thoughts as we will be faced with more and more of these requests in the future.
Thursday, March 09, 2006
Budget 06-07
" People who complain about taxes can be divided into two classes: men and women." ~Author Unknown
The City Manager delivered his budget message to the City Council this week. Brian Kogut, the Finance Committee chairman, has scheduled several budget hearings for key departments to present their budgets for consideration. These departments include the Board of Education, whose budget makes up more than half of the total; police and fire; and public works. The submitted budget equals a little more than $175 million, almost $6 1/2 million more than the current budget ending June 2006. This represents a 3.82% increase, and would cause our tax rate to rise by 2.35 mills. According to the City Manager, this means the tax increase on a median priced home in Meriden would be almost $20 a month, or $235 for the year. Critical cost drivers are no surprise: escalating employee benefits expense, especially in health care, and also required pension contributions; energy costs; and educational costs for our schools.
And although economic development has been healthy, and our grand list rose by almost 2%, the revenues expected are offset by less than average additional revenues from the State proposed by the Governor. Federal revenue which passed through the state to the City is also declining. The City Manager and his staff nevertheless propose a budget with little flexibility for cuts if the City wishes to maintain current services. It will be the job of the Finance Committee to see if the proposed increase can be reduced even further. The challenge every year grows harder. I invite members of the public to share their thoughts on what services could be reduced or eliminated without harming the quality of life severely in Meriden. I also would like suggestions on improving revenue, especially in terms of economic development. Feel free to share here, or come to the budget hearings. The dates can be obtained by calling the City Council's office at 630-4125 during business hours, or checking the public meeting calendar on the
The City Manager delivered his budget message to the City Council this week. Brian Kogut, the Finance Committee chairman, has scheduled several budget hearings for key departments to present their budgets for consideration. These departments include the Board of Education, whose budget makes up more than half of the total; police and fire; and public works. The submitted budget equals a little more than $175 million, almost $6 1/2 million more than the current budget ending June 2006. This represents a 3.82% increase, and would cause our tax rate to rise by 2.35 mills. According to the City Manager, this means the tax increase on a median priced home in Meriden would be almost $20 a month, or $235 for the year. Critical cost drivers are no surprise: escalating employee benefits expense, especially in health care, and also required pension contributions; energy costs; and educational costs for our schools.
And although economic development has been healthy, and our grand list rose by almost 2%, the revenues expected are offset by less than average additional revenues from the State proposed by the Governor. Federal revenue which passed through the state to the City is also declining. The City Manager and his staff nevertheless propose a budget with little flexibility for cuts if the City wishes to maintain current services. It will be the job of the Finance Committee to see if the proposed increase can be reduced even further. The challenge every year grows harder. I invite members of the public to share their thoughts on what services could be reduced or eliminated without harming the quality of life severely in Meriden. I also would like suggestions on improving revenue, especially in terms of economic development. Feel free to share here, or come to the budget hearings. The dates can be obtained by calling the City Council's office at 630-4125 during business hours, or checking the public meeting calendar on the
City Website.Friday, March 03, 2006
Week in Review
The first week of this new blog is now over, and I'm very pleased with the response it has generated. We've had over 300 visitors, and obviously a number have posted comments to topics of interest to them. And I've only had to delete one that got out of hand in the beginning of the week. I congratulate and thank anyone who's posted, either anonymously or not. Your viewpoints have been enlightening, and I'm sure they're being read by a number of policy makers, both on the city and state level.
The hottest topic has been the sports complex. It's unfortunate the weather forestalled last night's public hearing, but in the interest of safety, it was the right thing to do to reschedule. I hope there will be a wealth of information available when the public is heard on March 13 (5:30, Washington Middle School. It will be videotaped.).
On Monday, the City Council meets for its bi-monthly meeting. Of particular note is that the council will take a final vote on the Charter Revision Commission Report. Personally, I will be supporting the commission's recommendation on the proposed referendum on significantly large city expenditures, the sole item they were charged with by the Council to investigate as a result of a petition last year. I'll also support the technical corrections to the Charter they recommend, as well as a loophole regarding Board appointments. I will be interested in the discussion on the balance of the recommendations by the rest of the Council, but I believe the Public Comment process is satisfactory as it stands. City Council rules allow that to change with a 2/3 vote without resorting to changing the Charter, and I'm comfortable with that.
The City Manager will also present his budget message to the Council, which will be referred to the Finance Committee for deliberation over the next couple months. I've seen a draft, and I believe Larry Kendzior and his staff worked hard to put a difficult budget together for the Council's consideration. There will be budget hearings scheduled by Brian Kogut, Finance Chair, and a public hearing, before it is accepted and a mill rate is voted on in May.
Also, it's my understanding that the Mayor had requested Ross Gulino to resign his recently appointed seat on the Planning Commission, and Ross acquiesced. The mayor has placed Art Geary's name on the agenda for approval Monday. I respect Ross' decision, but I'm sorry he will leave the Commission before he had a chance to offer his experience. He's already done good things in the City, and I hope he continues to be active in making Meriden better.
I think a lot was learned over the past couple weeks about the appointment process. I hope to discuss this more here in the future.
Thanks again for your interest in "Meriden City Council Talk." I look forward to hearing from all of you (and more) as we go on.
The hottest topic has been the sports complex. It's unfortunate the weather forestalled last night's public hearing, but in the interest of safety, it was the right thing to do to reschedule. I hope there will be a wealth of information available when the public is heard on March 13 (5:30, Washington Middle School. It will be videotaped.).
On Monday, the City Council meets for its bi-monthly meeting. Of particular note is that the council will take a final vote on the Charter Revision Commission Report. Personally, I will be supporting the commission's recommendation on the proposed referendum on significantly large city expenditures, the sole item they were charged with by the Council to investigate as a result of a petition last year. I'll also support the technical corrections to the Charter they recommend, as well as a loophole regarding Board appointments. I will be interested in the discussion on the balance of the recommendations by the rest of the Council, but I believe the Public Comment process is satisfactory as it stands. City Council rules allow that to change with a 2/3 vote without resorting to changing the Charter, and I'm comfortable with that.
The City Manager will also present his budget message to the Council, which will be referred to the Finance Committee for deliberation over the next couple months. I've seen a draft, and I believe Larry Kendzior and his staff worked hard to put a difficult budget together for the Council's consideration. There will be budget hearings scheduled by Brian Kogut, Finance Chair, and a public hearing, before it is accepted and a mill rate is voted on in May.
Also, it's my understanding that the Mayor had requested Ross Gulino to resign his recently appointed seat on the Planning Commission, and Ross acquiesced. The mayor has placed Art Geary's name on the agenda for approval Monday. I respect Ross' decision, but I'm sorry he will leave the Commission before he had a chance to offer his experience. He's already done good things in the City, and I hope he continues to be active in making Meriden better.
I think a lot was learned over the past couple weeks about the appointment process. I hope to discuss this more here in the future.
Thanks again for your interest in "Meriden City Council Talk." I look forward to hearing from all of you (and more) as we go on.
Thursday, March 02, 2006
Public Hearing on Sports Complex Postponed
Due to weather conditions, the public hearing scheduled for this evening has been postponed until March 13, 5:30 p.m. at Washington Middle School.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.JPG)