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.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Zerio-
Would you please tell the people who think so little of Meriden that they should get out and volunteer in the community of their choice? I think they could use some perspective. Get involved and find out how much is going on in Meriden. Do you know that there are several Meriden residents who are working very hard to organize a Youth Orchestra for the region? Hmmm?

Meriden is a great group of people:
in the Central Connecticut Civic Youth Orchestra's case, musicians, parents, businessmen, elected officials and 'just plain folks' are putting their energy into the next generation of musicians and they could use your help. Volunteer your time, do what you can, help mentor music students, you'll find out how swell this City is! Or, if music isn't your thing, find someone else to help. You certainly seem to have a lot of energy, use your energy for the common good.

Anonymous said...

This morning I read an article in the RJ (3/7/06) about the purposed budget for 2006 which calls for a tax increase. The article stated that one of the reasons behind the increase is the cost of health insurance for city employees. I have two solutions which my help our city decrease some of the tax burden on our citizens.

First, lets eliminate the town sponsored automobile program (including gas, and monthly repair stipend) for non-emergency employees. Also should a city employee who lives outside the city limits really enjoy such a perk??

Second, it seems that most of corporate America has trended towards employees contributing more to their healthcare cost to offset some of the increase. My insurance now requires I pay 10% on most of the services covered. This helps the bottom line drastically.

Lastly, perhaps some one could answer this question for me. Why is the anticipated increase on the outer district higher when we receive less city services? Shouldn't these increases be consistent across the city?

Mark

Stephen T. Zerio said...

Anonymous Mark suggested some ways to reduce the tax burden, which I appreciate. On the matter of employee cars and stipends, the City Manager is taking steps to reduce these costs. He has heard from virtually all the councilors on this matter over the past several weeks. With regard to the vehicle issue, the travel allowances paid to management staff have been reviewed and reduced to reflect the City Manager's best estimate of the actual travel involved, so that management is only being reimbursed at the approximate IRS travel rate as any other employee would be.

With regard to vehicles which are taken home, Mr. Kendzior has asked all the department heads to provide a written explanation of why certain personnel have take home vehicles. Any change in this area will have to be negotiated, and that will need to be done when the contract periods expire. Negotiations are underway with a couple unions whose contracts are up, but this process takes time. He advises councilors and the public that we need to understand that the City will not be able to bargain away the use of the vehicles without giving something in return, and that any changes will take time because they are subject to being bargained. However, the guideline is to reduce these costs and he will work toward that.

Health insurance is also a bargained benefit, and the City has in fact negotiated increases to the employee cost share. These cost shares are analyzed and raised each time contracts come up for renewal. Benefit design has also been more restrictive than past programs. This is an issue all across America, and one that really requires a federal solution, in my opinion.

On the percentage increase, the outer district is higher because the projected across-the-board mill increase is calculated against a smaller mill rate in the outer district, because they don't receive trash service. Crazy math. Thank you for your ideas, keep 'em coming. I hope to add a separate post on the budget deliberation soon, so readers can focus their comments there, alon with ideas on cutting costs or services and increasing revenues that the Finance Committee can consider.

To l.ghidini, I understand your frustration. I've been working hard with my colleagues over the years to make Meriden an attractive place to live, learn, work and grow business. The tax rate is clearly an obstacle , but it is a many-headed hydra, one that seems to attack urban centers harder than the suburban and ex-urban. When we cut one head by attracting new business, we face another with rising educational costs, which have to be subsidized more and more by the property tax. That's just one example. It's a vicous circle, sometimes, but we need keep our eye on the longer view, with increased economic development projects that helps minimize the overall tax burden. True property tax reform needs to be enacted as well, but that too is a difficult challenge in the state today. All this being said, I thank you for building and staying in Meriden. We need more of the likes of you.