NewHartfordPlus.com

The Board of Finance members used most of their regular meeting last night to consider the tax increase for the upcoming fiscal year. Their final motion of the evening summed up the result of their deliberations:

• Increase revenue by $22,000
• Reduce the New Hartford Public Schools Board of Ed Capital expenditures to a total of $85,000
• Increase the tax collection rate to 97.5%

Total expenditures were set at $21,542,637.00,  which results in a 0.92% tax increase for the 2011-12 Fiscal Year Town Budget.

The motion passed with Dan Charest, Alesia Kennerson and Laura Sundquist voting in favor of it; Reggie Smith and Roy Litchfield voted against it.  Roy was seated for Jim Fitzgerald who was not at the meeting.

The above increase includes a 1.79% increase for the New Hartford Public Schools (elementary schools), and a 2% increase in the town’s assessment from Regional # 7 (Middle and High Schools).  It also maintains intact the Town Administration’s Capital expenditures, including $90,000 to complete Brown’s Corner and $50,000 for a new roof at the Field House at Brodie Park and to fund a Rec study for potential new playing fields. The one Capital Expenditures item requested by the Rec Commission, $25,000 for the septic system at Berkshire Hall at Brodie Park, was cut by the BOF members during their Special Meeting on March 22.

Regular Agenda Items

Before the discussion of the budget for the upcoming year got under way, the BOF members went through their regular agenda items (see agenda of this meeting at the end of this report). The regular items were dealt with speedily; following is a quick report of several of those items.

I.Seating of Alternates: Roy Litchfield was seated for Jim Fitzgerald who was not at the meeting. Jim, however, had emailed his fellow BOF members a 4-point motion regarding (at least in part) the Regional # 7 budget and he had asked that they act on the motion in his absence. Ben Witte, Chairman of the BOF, said it was unclear whether under the Freedom of Information Act such emailing outside of a formal meeting was legal. He said he wouldn’t act on Jim’s motion unless one of the BOF members present wanted to take it on as their own; no-one did so and the meeting continued.

IV.Opportunity for Public to Speak: Ben made clear to the handful of members of the public at the meeting that this was their only opportunity to make comments. Two residents spoke briefly: Denton Butler who said that he had emailed the BOF members that morning regarding his views on the budget and that he had nothing further to add. The following day our reporter obtained a copy of Denton’s email which we will post following this report. The second person to address the BOF members was our reporter, speaking as a taxpayer, who reminded the Board of Finance members that they had been entrusted by the taxpayers to take care of their finances and that she hoped that they would keep the taxpayers’ needs uppermost in their minds when they finalized their budget later that evening.

V.Reports:

The following reports were made to the Board of Finance:

a. BOE/Superintendents Report – Phillip O’Reilly

b. Bookkeeper’s Report – Annie Witte

c. Treasurer’s Report – Gordon Ross

d. First Selectman’s Report – Dan Jerram

These reports will be dealt with in a separate article so they will not be lost in the budget discussion.

VII. Other Items to Come Before the Board:

At the very end of the meeting Reggie addressed the letter that our reporter, Maria Moore and her husband, Bob Moore handed to the BOF during the recent Budget Hearing in which they asked for a return to considering the budget during the Annual Budget Meeting as provided by state statute; see our April 6 article for a copy of the letter and the relevant state statute and town ordinance.  he said that the letter should be referred to the Board of Selectmen who could best address it.  Ben agreed and said that the letter had been forwarded to the Board of Selectmen.  He added: “I think the process is fine.  If there are legal issues, they won’t come for this Board.”

Discussion Leading To The Proposed 0.92% Tax Increase

Ben started the budget discussion by asking the Board members whether they felt there should be any changes to the budget following the feedback they had received from the Public Hearing.  Alesia Kennerson, BOF member, was the only one to comment, saying: “I don’t think we need to make any changes.”

Reggie started the discussion of specific items by saying: “For the doors and windows (replacement at Antolini School) there’s an estimate of $500,000.  I want to discuss that.”

Dr. Philip O’Reilly, Superintendent of New Hartford Public Schools, said that he had met with Alesia, Roy and Denton with regard to that project.  Alesia said that she’d like to see that project bonded in the future with the roof.  Ben said he’d asked Philip to touch base with Alesia and to have a Plan B in place.  He said it wasn’t ready yet and felt more like a bonding project and he’d suggested getting Denton from the BOC (Building Oversight Committee for the wastewater treatment plant) involved “for another set of eyes.”

The BOF members went on to discuss the various capital projects that could be done at the schools, including refurbishing the library.  Steve Tuxbury, Board of Ed member and a member of their Facilities Committee, expressed his displeasure that they had all agreed to take on the project and that they’d hired the engineering company and spent $20,000 and that they will lose some of that if they do the project later.  Ben responded: “The numbers (for the project) are all over the place.”  Dan Charest  said that the Board was now more amenable to bonding (now that they were that much closer to the bond for the Bakerville renovations being paid off).

Reggie made a motion to remove the doors and windows project from the 2011-12 budget but that project had not been included since the plan had been to pay for it with funds from the reserve fund which they were looking to draw down; see the discussion at the BOF Special Meeting on March 22.  Ben said they were not ready to do the windows and doors project.

Ben then asked the BOF members: “What are we going to go to the taxpayers with a tax increase?”  He said they should decide what they want for the budget and then look at capital.

Ben then said that there had been an error in the formula that they had been using to calculate the tax rate, that the Motor Vehicle taxes had been double counted.  By correcting the formula, then the 1.8% tax increase based on a 96.5% collection rate would actually be 1.8% based on a 97.15% collection rate.

They calculated that for a 0% increase they would need $300,000, in a combination of reduced expenditures or increase in income.  If Regional were to come in at zero, they said they would still need $180,000 taken out of the rest of the budget.  They cut the Board of Ed Capital expenditures to $85,000 (bearing in mind that they would be looking at bonding the doors and windows project, the roof at Bakerville, etc.); they increased the collection rate to 97.5%.

They were still not at zero and at one point Reggie said: “If the local schools and the town government have cuts, (I’d) love to hear it.”  No cuts in capital expenditures were offered by the First Selectman, keeping intact the  $140,000 he had allocated to Brown’s Corner and to the Field House/Rec Study.

With no other cuts available, Ben said: “I don’t think it will be at zero.  If the voters don’t pass it, we’ll be back (at working the budget).”

They had discussed cutting the $40,000 for the next revaluation of property from the budget, but later decided to put it back in.

In the end, they decided on the following:

• Increase revenue by $22,000 (including the difference between the actual and the estimate revenue from Burlington from sharing the Assessor, etc.);
• Reduce the New Hartford Public Schools Board of Ed Capital expenditures to a total of $85,000;
• Increase the tax collection rate to 97.5%.

This resulted in total expenditures of $21,542,637.00, which resulted in a 0.92% tax increase for the 2011-12 Fiscal Year Town Budget.

Capital Reserve Fund Approved For New Hartford Schools’ Board Of Ed Use

With $30,000 excess capital from this year’s budget, the Board of Finance members agreed to allow the local schools’ Board of Ed to establish a Capital Reserve Fund for them to use for unexpected expenses.  The town had also received a $30,000 reimbursement from the state for the boiler replacement project at Antolini and Philip asked if that money could also be added to the Capital Reserve Fund.  The Board of Finance members did not agree to adding that,  saying that it was for reimbursement of funds that had been expended.

____________________

BOARD OF FINANCE
AGENDA – April 12,2011

I.Seating of Alternates

II.Adoption/Revision of Agenda

III.Approval of Minutes

a.4/5/11 budget hearing

b.3/22/11 special meeting

c.3/8/11 regular meeting

IV.Opportunity for Public to Speak

V.Reports:

a.BOE/Superintendents Report – Phillip O’Reilly

b.Bookkeeper’s Report – Annie Witte

c.Treasurer’s Report – Gordon Ross

d.First Selectman’s Report – Dan Jerram

VI.2011-12 Budget – finalize budget recommendations

VII.Other Items to Come Before the Board

VIII.Adjournment

The Board of Finance held a Budget Hearing on Tuesday, April 5 at which all three budgets were presented by their respective bodies to residents. Bob Moore, NewHartfordPlus techie, video’ed the three-hour meeting and he will be adding three separate videos of the hearing as they are processed.  Below is the first video of the Regional # 7 presentation:

Video # 1: Northwestern Regional # 7 Budget Presentation

After Board of Finance member Reggie Smith opened the meeting and handed the chairmanship back to Ben Witte (who had rearranged his work travel schedule to be at the hearing), the first budget was presented by Molly Sexton Read, Chairperson of Northwestern Regional # 7 Board of Ed. Following is the video of her presentation:

.

Video # 2: Town Administration Budget Presentation

The second budget presentation was made by First Selectman Dan Jerram. Following is the video of his presentation:

.

Video # 3: New Hartford Public Schools Budget Presentation

The final budget presentation was made by Superintendent Dr. Philip O’Reilly. Following is the video of his presentation.  Included are some of the comments made after the presentation.

At last night’s Board of Finance Meeting the NewHartfordPlus Crew handed a letter to the Board of Finance asking for the return to taxpayers of their statutory right to be able to consider the proposed town budget during the Annual Budget Meeting. Taxpayers will then have the ability once again to make adjustments to each item by reducing the amount allocated to that item.  The taxpayer-adjusted town budget is then brought to a vote, either during the Annual Budget Meeting or by adjourning to referendum.

Below is a copy of Maria and Bob Moore’s letter, as well as the 1990 Town Ordinance which specifies that the vote on the budget will be by referendum but which still allows taxpayers the ability to discuss (including adjusting line items as per the state statute).  We also include a copy of State Statute 7-344, Appropriations, Laying of tax, that specifies the process by which a town budget is arrived at.  New Hartford is governed by State Statute. i.e. the town does not have a charter by which it is governed, and therefore we are governed by State Statutes.

Maria And Bob Moore’s Letter

The number of the Moores' street address has been deleted according to their wish.

Town Ordinance Submitting Town Budget To Referendum After Discussion At Town Meeting

State Statute 7-344. Appropriations. Laying of tax.

.
We will provide an update to this report once additional information becomes available.

Many Thanks to the Friends of NewHartfordPlus who have shared their knowledge and expertise to help clarify a very unclear process.

By: Bob & Maria Moore

The Board of Finance held a Special Meeting on Tuesday evening, March 22, with a twofold purpose: the first, to hear public comments on the budget process so far, and the second, to discuss the Town Budget for the upcoming fiscal year 2011-12. The meeting was held at Ann Antolini in the Multi-Purpose room to accommodate any number of residents who might turn out for the meeting.

Bob Moore, NewHartfordPlus techie, videotaped the Public Comment section of the meeting and is making that video available below.

Altogether, about two dozen residents attended the meeting and of those 8 or so gave their input on the budget. Most of those who spoke addressed the high cost of education in the budget and asked for those costs to be brought under control.

A much greater number of residents had chosen to communicate in writing with the BOF members, and of those the overwhelming majority were in support of a zero-increase budget. They, most likely, had written in response to an email that circulated among taxpayers alerting them of the 5.69% increase in property taxes that would result from the proposed budgets that had been presented at the Saturday morning Budget Workshop.see the copy of the email posted on NewHartfordPlus.

“I received 30 emails, and only one was in favor of the budgets that were proposed (at the Board of Finance’s Saturday morning Budget Workshop).” Ben Witte, BOF Chairman said. He then read aloud portions of several of the emails he had received to give a sense of residents’ input: to hold the line on spending, especially on education. “Looking at the names on these emails – they’re not the kinds of people you usually hear from.” He commented. Other BOF members agreed, saying that they too had received similar emails.

With the Public Comment portion of the meeting closed, the BOF members then turned their attention to a discussion of the Town budget for the upcoming fiscal year; see our companion report After Taxpayers Give Their Input, Board Of Finance Considers Budget, Eyes 1.8% Tax Increase.

Following is the video of the Public Comment section of the March 22 Board of Finance meeting:

UPDATED: To correct who voted for Reggie’s motion of position and to add the second motion regarding Regional’s budget; Mar. 29, 2011.

By: Maria Moore

The Board of Finance held a Special Meeting on Tuesday evening, March 22, with a twofold purpose: first, to hear public comments on the Town Budget for the upcoming fiscal year, and second, to discuss the Town Budget and its tax ramifications for taxpayers. The meeting was held at Ann Antolini in the Multi-Purpose room to accommodate any number of residents who might turn out for the meeting.

The Special Meeting started at 7 p.m. and the Board of Finance (BOF) members devoted the first hour to listening to taxpayers’ input on the budget. Most of the 8 or so taxpayers who spoke made the case for containing the ever-increasing cost of education and for a no-tax increase budget. Many more taxpayers had chosen to submit their comments in writing to the various members of the Board of Finance; their written comments also strongly supported a zero percent tax increase in the Town Budget for the upcoming fiscal year. BOF Chairman Ben Witte read a few lines from the 30 emails he had received all of which, except one, overwhelmingly supported a budget which would result in no increase in the tax rate.  He added the communications to the record of the Special Meeting.

A video of the Public Comments section of the Special Meeting has been posted in a separate report by Bob Moore, NewHarfordPlus techie.

The Public Comment section of the meeting ended, the Board of Finance members turned their attention to considering the proposed budget. That discussion lasted until 10 p.m. and by its end the BOF members settled provisionally on a 1.8% tax increase for the upcoming fiscal year – assuming, that is, that Regional #7 comes back with a revised budget with a zero percent increase which would reduce Regional’s assessment to the town by $70,000.  Following is our report of the two-hour discussion.

2011-12 Proposed Budget, Issued 3/22/11

A copy of the 2011-12 Proposed Budget, dated 3/22/11 – the date of the Special Meeting – was made available to the press. Download a copy of that proposed budget: 2011-12 Proposed Budget, 3/22/11 (184)

Discussion of the Revenue side of the Proposed Budget

The Board of Finance members discussed the revenue side of the budget at different points in the meeting.  They went over the Projected Revenue sheet (the second to the last page in the Proposed Budget dated 3-22-11), stopping at several of the items to fine-tune the amounts listed for those items.  For ease of use, download the Projected Revenue sheet individually: Projected Revenues - FY 2011-12, dated 3/22/11 (134)

The first item discussed was the FEMA Reimbursement (for a winter storm that FEMA is reimbursing the additional costs), a $45,000 item that had not been included in the previous draft dated 3-7 which was discussed at the Saturday morning Budget Workshop on March 12.  The BOE members asked the First Selectman, Dan Jerram, if that was a reasonable amount to expect to be reimbursed.  Dan said that the town had put in for $83,000 and that had been approved.  The BOF members changed the $45,000 figure to $60,000.  They then touched on the Manufacturers’ taxes reimbursement which is being eliminated by the state.  They decided to show that as a $135,938 loss of revenue, although they did add $12,000 for the Retail Tax reimbursement.  They also had added to the Projected Budget the state reimbursement of $112,903 for the windows and doors replacements at Antolini School, one of the projects on the proposed Capital Expenditures  part of the budget. The last credit amount to the Projected Revenues is $144,979, the Surplus projected from the current fiscal year; this Surplus amount is always added to the following year’s revenues.

The Projected Revenues sheet still showed the town projected revenues before taxes to be $4,854,683, which is a $73,225.39 shortfall compared to this year’s (2010-11) total revenues before taxes of $4,927,908.  The $73,225.39 shortfall is a lot less than the $194,649.39 shortfall on the Projected Revenues sheet that had been presented at the March 12 Budget Workshop.

Tax Collection Rate And Drawdown Of Town Reserve Fund

Two other factors also impacted the revenue side of the equation.   When the BOF members were later balancing revenues with expenses to calculate the amount of taxes needed to fund the Town budget, they agreed to adjust the tax collection rate from 96% to 96.5% in recognition of the fact that the actual collection rate has been over 98% for the past dozen years or so.  BOF members also agreed to draw down the town’s reserve fund from the 15% level at which it now stands; the town’s advisor has told the town that the reserve number could be brought down to 11% without affecting the town’s bond rating.

While discussing the New Hartford Schools’ Capital Expenditures Requests (much later in this report), Ben Witte, BOF Chairman, said that taking $160,000 from the town’s reserves would reduce the percentage of the Reserve Fund from 15% to 13% [ or 14% - to be verified with Ben ].  Rather than adding this reserve drawdown to the town’s revenues for the upcoming fiscal year, which would then create a  deficit in the following year’s (2012-13) budget, the BOF members discussed using this approximately $160,000 (if they were to draw down the Reserve Fund by 1%) to fund capital projects for the local schools’ buildings.

Expenditures Side of the Proposed Budget

The New Hartford Board of Ed had submitted a revised budget dated Tuesday, March 15, showing the cuts that the Board of Ed had approved in their meeting of March 15.  That budget showed a 1.71% increase due to the unforseen high Special Ed costs.  Download a copy of the latest New Hartford Schools Board of Ed Budget: New Hartford Schools Board of Ed Budget, March 15 (132).

The only unknown element in the budget was the Regional # 7 revised budget which the Regional Board of Ed was to approve on Wednesday evening, the day after the Special Meeting (that meeting was subsequently cancelled due to the snow forecast, and the Regional Board of Ed met on Thursday evening, March 24 after their budget presentation in Norfolk).  The Board of Finance members had asked for a zero percent increase from Regional but they didn’t have any additional information on Regional’s revised budget at the time of their Special Meeting.

Without a revised budget number from Regional available to them at their Tuesday evening Special Meeting, the BOF members based their discussions on the assumption that Regional # 7 would revise their budget down to a zero percent increase, making the assessment to New Hartford $7,830,914.  This reflected a $70,000 reduction in the assessment of $7,901,580 to the town in Regional’s proposed budget presented at the BOF’s Saturday morning Budget Workshop on March 12.

Town Administration Proposed Budget And Capital Expenditures

The Town Administration proposed budget reflected a zero percent increase and the BOF members did not discuss that budget, focusing briefly only on the proposed Capital Expenditures sheet of the town budget.  For ease of reference, download that Capital Expenditures sheet:  Town Administration Proposed Capital Expenditures with 3/22/11 budget (134).

The only change made by the BOF members to the Town Administration’s Capital Expenditures proposed items was to eliminate the $25,000 for the septic system at Brodie Park (item “Park & Rec Capital renamed”).  Reggie Smith proposed the motion, Alesia Kennerson seconded it, and the BOF members approved it unanimously.

New Hartford Public Schools’ Capital Expenditures

The discussion then moved onto the New Hartford Schools’ Capital Expenditures Requests sheet; download that individual sheet for ease of reference:  NH Schools Capital Expenditures Requests, March 15, 2011 (159).

The BOF members discussed the local schools’ capital expenditures items at length.  Most members of the schools’ Board of Ed as well as Superintendent Dr. Philip O’Reilly were still present at the meeting and BOF member Dan Charest asked them: “What do you guys really need?”  To which Sue Lundin, the BOE Chairperson, answered: “The projects are prioritized.”  According to the numbers next to the items on their capital expenditures sheet, the New Hartford Schools prioritized their needs as follows:

1. Roof at Bakerville School: $28,900 (with possible 45% reimbursement)
2. Replacement of the Piping Sump & Supply/Return Fuel Lines at Antolini School: $16,736
3. Windows and Doors at Antolini School: $250,000 (possible reimbursement of 45%)
4. Air Handlers at Antolini School: $80,000

Reggie Smith proposed taking a straw vote on each of the items to see where the BOF members stood on the items – it is unclear from our reporter’s notes whether Reggie was proposing a straw vote on only the items on the schools’ Capital Expenditures sheet or on each of the budget items that had been discussed to that point in the meeting).  Dan Charest intervened, asking Reggie: “What would you do with the (town surplus) money?”  Reggie answered: “I’m trying to get the capital down as much as possible for the taxpayers.”  Dan Charest asked: “Would you use the (reserve) money as revenue?”  Ben Witte said that they could do the same next year: do half a percent (drawdown of the town reserves) over two years, i.e. $70,000 each year.  Ben said that for now he would be in favor of increasing the collection rate (from 96% to 96.5%).  The discussion of alternate uses of the money to be withdrawn from the town’s reserves ended there.  Later in the meeting, the New Harford Schools’ Superintendent was told that $125,000 of additional funding (including money from the Reserve Fund, one presumes) would be made available to fund all the items on the schools’ Capital Expenditures Request sheet.

The discussion about the schools’ projects included whether the replacement of the doors and windows at Antolini schools could be done over two years, whether the air handlers could be replaced over several years.

Reggie Smith asked when the payments on the Bakerville School bonds would end (from renovations done at that school in prior years) and Dan Jerram said the payments would end in September of 2013.  Reggie asked about the payments on the Pine Meadow (New Hartford) Elementary School and he was told that they had a while left to go since those were 20-year bonds.  Reggie then said that he favored putting off doing the windows and doors and the air handlers and do them in a couple of years when the Bakerville bonds had been paid off; with the favorable bond rates, they could pay off some of the old bonds and roll them into a new one.   Dan Jerram said that the selectmen had talked about that last year but had voted to hold off doing that, to do the work  over several years.  Selectman Tom Klebart said that if the last payment for Bakerville is in 2013, and they would need to do planning for the projects, it might be worth looking at (doing what Reggie had suggested).  Jim Fitzgerald said that he’d like to see zero increase in all the budgets and that they needed to bring the Reserve Fund down because they were overtaxing the taxpayers.  Alesia Kennerson said they had $50,000 left over from the boilers (which had cost a lot less than budgeted), and they’d have $30,000 let after paying for the engineering of the windows and doors project.  Ben added that from the town side, there’s $60,000 available from this year’s budget.

Dan Charest asked: “If we’re looking at regionalization, should we be doing capital projects (at the schools)?  Alesia asked: “If we regionalize, which schools would we get rid of?”  It wouldn’t be Antolini, it was generally agreed.  At one point Ben said that $250,000 in Capital Expenditures for the schools would get the capital level (the same amount as last year).

At intermittent points in the discussion, Ben and Alesia crunched numbers to see how the things being discussed would affect the bottom line of the budget.  Various scenarios were discussed and with the time creeping closer to 10 p.m. (or flying – depending on the point of view of those at the meeting) there still seemed to be no clear picture emerging.  Reggie maintained steadfastly that they needed to keep to a budget resulting in a zero percent increase in taxes and at one point Jim said that they couldn’t do it without Regional’s numbers.

Reggie proposed taking a vote to see where the individual Board members stood.  He asked for a number for the budget including capital expenditures.   Ben said: “The numbers we’re at right now are 2.33% tax increase at a 96% collection rate, and 1.8%tax increase at a 96.5% collection rate.”  That was with Regional coming in at zero percent increase resulting in $70,000 less in the town’s assessment, it was clarified.

Reggie asked about raising the collection rate some more since it had been at over 98% for the past 8-12 years.  He asked Ben: “What if you put it in at 97% now?”  Ben did some calculation and said: “At 97% (collection rate) it’s 1.27% (tax increase).”  Ben, however, went back to a 96.5% collection rate.

Reggie proposed a “motion of position” as he termed it: “Motion to approve a budget including everything but Regional # 7 at $13,889,751 with $412,836 of capital expenditures ($250,000 for the town and $262,000 for the local Board of Ed).”

Philip O’Reilly pointed out that the Capital Expenditures for the schools was $375,000.  Ben again said that the schools’ capital was reduced to $262,000.  Alesia said they would draw from the reserves to fund it (the Capital Expenditures on the local schools’ sheet).  Ben told Philip they had another source of funding (other than the Budget).

A vote was taken on Reggie’s motion: “Motion to approve a budget including everything but Regional # 7 at $13,889,751 with $412,836 of capital expenditures ($250,000 for the town and $262,000 for the local Board of Ed).”  These budget numbers in the motion would result in a 1.8% tax increase to the town’s taxpayers at the 96.5% collection rate.  The motion passed 3 to 2. Reggie voted against it as did Laura Sundquist.

There was also another motion that was passed instructing Regional # 7 to come back with a zero percent increase in the assessment to the towns in total.

The meeting ended, with Ben saying that he would put together a presentation based on the discussions they had had in that evening’s meeting.  The presentation will be given at the next step of the budget process: the Public Hearing scheduled for Tuesday, April 5.

If you have questions regarding the budget process, please contact any of the Board of Finance members whose email addresses were posted in a previous report.

Please Note: Our reporter’s article above is a based on her notes from the meeting; she is not an accountant and makes no claims of having any special knowledge of bookkeeping.  If you have corrections, additions or clarifications to the report above, we welcome your input – especially if it is given in a spirit of goodwill.  Thanks for your understanding of our volunteer efforts.

Board of Finance members (from left to right) are Reggie Smith, Alesia Kennerson, Jim Fitzgerald, Ben Witte, Penny Miller (recording secretary), Dan Charest, Laura Sundquist and Dr. Bill Rieger

By: Maria Moore

After the Saturday morning Budget Workshop held by the Board of Finance, at which they received a clear message that they needed to come back with reduced budgets, both the New Hartford Public Schools Board of Ed and the Northwestern Regional #7 Board of Ed held meetings to review their proposed budgets in light of the Board of Finance’s input.  Below are summaries of their discussions.  Neither one of the two Boards of Ed has submitted a revised copy of their proposed budget to the Town Clerk’s Office.  Hopefully, those revised copies will be available at the Board of Finance’s Special Meeting later this evening, Tuesday, March 22.

New Hartford Public Schools Board of Ed Meeting – March 15:

The Board of Ed members were given a revised proposed budget titled “0% + Special Education” which is the budget they’d been asked by the Board of Finance to come up with.  This they decided, came down to 0% plus $129,000 for Special Ed, resulting in a total increase of 1.71%.  They then had to decide on making cuts of $223,852 to get down to the zero budget.

They eventually decided on the following cuts: two Library Media Assistants; one Grade 5 Teacher; one Curriculum Coordinator; musical instruments; an annuity (for the incoming Principal?); maintenance projects; technology equipment; supplies and textbooks; library.

Two non-tenured teachers would not have their contracts renewed and one of the district’s two curriculum coordinators would return to the classroom.

Having reduced the budget to zero percent increase, Steve Tuxbury moved to accept the budget as amended. The motion didn’t pass; instead Katie Fisk Natale proposed the motion: “To accept the list of recommended cuts identified in the meeting in order to meet the Board of Finance request for a zero budget.” That motion passed.

The Board of Ed members then considered their Capital projects. Steve made the motion to prioritize them as follows: 1. The roof at Bakerville; 2: the replacement of the Piping and the return fuel lines; 3: the windows and doors project at Antolini; and 4: the air handlers at Antolioni. The motion was passed.

It was left to Dr. Philip O’Reilly, Superintendent of Schools, to make the above changes to the New Hartford Schools proposed budget.

Northwestern Regional # 7 Board of Ed Special Meeting, March 16:

The Regional # 7 Board of Ed members discussed the fact that they had received a demand to come back with a zero percent budget, and that the New Hartford Schools had been asked for a zero percent plus Special Ed costs. They decided that since the increases in Special Ed were fixed, they too would reduce their budget to 0% + increases in Special Ed costs. That would result in a 1.55 to 2% overall budget increase. That percentage was later reduced to 1.25% increase in the overall budget.

With that guidance set, Judy Palmer, Superintedent of Schools, said she could go back to her board, and start to make the cuts that were most removed from the students.

The Board of Ed members agreed to leave it to Judy to come up with a revised budget that met their criteria. Judy was to email a copy of the revised budget to the Board of Ed members and they were to hold a special meeting to agree on the revisions before taking that revised budget proposal to any of their towns.

The Board of Ed members agreed to set a Special Meeting for this evening, Tuesday, March 22 at 6:00 p.m. to discuss the revised budget proposal.

The town’s Board of Finance members have been receiving many communications from New Hartford taxpayers on the budget which is currently being put together for the upcoming fiscal year, beginning July 1, 2011. The budgets presented to the Board of Finance members at their Saturday morning Budget Workshop on March 12 would result in a 5.69% property tax increase if they were not adjusted. We understand that 95% of the communications being received by the BOF members are in favor of a zero percent increase budget. The email below was forwarded to us as an example of the type of communication being received by the BOF members:

Subject: Impending New Hartford Budget

To the Board of Finance:

I felt it was incumbent upon myself to get out to you my thoughts as a taxpayer in the town of New Hartford, before we have any closure on the current budget cycle.

I understand that once more we are looking at a an increase in our education budget in excess of 5%. I just don’t get it, I really don’t. In my 14 years as a resident, about the only thing I can count on is for my taxes to go up regardless of general market conditions. We seem to like to play this game of leapfrog as I call it to find other towns who pay teachers better than us so that we have a rationale for having to increase what we pay at the risk “of losing teachers”. Not to mention the fact, we have never lost teachers and there are plenty more youngs ones coming out of school eager to take their place anyway. Once we raise our salaries the other towns then use the excuse New Hartford is paying more so we need to raise our salaries here to be competitive and the cycle continues unabated. It is always downplayed as if it were only a small amount relative to what I am already paying.

These “small” annual increases have added up over the years. Taxes on my home have tripled since I bought it and I wish I could say the same of my own salary which has essentially been flat over the same period. I know a significant number of people just like myself who have a hard time making ends meet and yet we are asked to spend more. Where is my retirement package and how can I even conceive of “retiring” in New Hartford. Exactly where is the voice of the taxpayer looking out for our interests and what we can afford. The vast majority of what I pay in tax goes to items I have not received one dime of service as I have never had children in school. Heck, now I even have to “pitch in” for the greater good with regards to the sewer plant. I didn’t see anyone write a check for me to replace my own septic system at a cost of $17,000.

To say I am exasperated or frustrated is an understatement. If I could only run my life on the fiscal restraint shown by my town government (spend everything you got because you can go back to the till for more) over the past 14 years my life too would be pretty good and then I can pass my debt on to the last man standing as I feel like it keeps getting passed to me. Something has to change, the sytem is broken and the methods employed don’t work. Not to mention it doesn’t help when you see town employees brought up on charges of embezzling and I am supposed to feel like someone is watching the henhouse, when in fact no one really is.

Stephen Bartolotta
New Hartford

By: Maria Moore

The proposed budget for the Town Administration portion of the Town budget for the upcoming fiscal year 2011-12 was presented to the Board of Finance members at their Saturday morning Budget Workshop on March 12. This report is on the presentation of the Town Administration budget given by First Selectman Dan Jerram, in which he outlined areas of his proposed budget that were cut or increased, as well as on the discussion related to the First Selectman’s budget.

Please note that the Board of Finance will be holding a Special Meeting this evening, Tuesday, March 22 when they will be looking for input from taxpayers on the three proposed budgets that go into the Town budget.

For ease of reference, download a copy of the proposed Town Administration budget:Town Administration Proposed Budget, FY 2011-12 (98).

Note: the above copy of the proposed budget has already been made available on NewHartfordPlus in our March 11 report Setting The Stage For Saturday’s Budget Workshop III: The Town’s Proposed Budget.

First Selectman Dan Jerram presented the proposed budget. Selectman Tom Klebart was at the meeting, Selectman Bruce Gresczyk was not. Also at the meeting were the town’s Bookkeeper, Annie Witte and the town’s Treasurer, Gordon Ross.

Dan began his presentation by saying that the town was starting with a $190,000 deficit for the coming year due to the loss of the reimbursement to the town of the manufacturers’ taxes that the state is proposing eliminating, an unexpected increase in the State Trooper line item, etc.

Dan said that Town Hall had operated on 781 man hours per year.  He has been making some changes and he projected staffing to be 13 to 15% under what it was in previous years.   He has been trying to keep costs down by sharing services, replacing specific positions, and putting in place a working foreman at the Highway Department, he said. There also isn’t the growth in the grand list: the 30-40 new homes per year that were being constructed under former First Selectman Bill Baxter (2001-2007) are gone and home renovations have seen a drop from 500,000 vs. 140,000.

Against this backdrop, First Selectman Dan Jerram said that his proposed budget was at zero, as requested by the Board of Finance, with the caveat that negotiations on the town employees’ contract is still ongoing. He also pointed out that the employees’ pension fund is at 59% liquidity even though it’s been funded at 100%. Board of Finance Chairman Ben Witte asked: On the pension do you know if the town and the schools are funding at the same level?” Dan answered that they are both funding at 100%.

On the positive side, it was said that the town’s reserve fund (surplus) is at 15% and the town’s advisor has recommended it to be kept at 13%, but it was felt that it shouldn’t drop lower than 11%.

Ben asked whether the shovelling of the school roofs would be covered by FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) but Dan said it would have had to occur during a specific 48-hour period to be reimbursable. He said that because of the collapses of roofs around the state he had been concerned and had urged the schools to spend the money to clear the roofs. If needed, he said, the town has a rainy day fund that could be used to cover that expense.

Returning to his proposed Town Administration budget, Dan said that it was only increasing by $1,900. He said he proposed to cut staff and to promote more team work. The Land Use Administrative Assistant would be cut. He said he had kept that position while the new employees in that department developed their skills. He said that Laura from the Assessors Office would be providing administrative assistance to the Land Use office. He said that Public Safety was where the big hit was, Dan said, with a $30,000 increase in the State Troopers’ costs ($20,000 was the higher salary of the trooper replacing Trooper Tranquillo who had been promoted, and $10,000 was the other trooper’s pay raise).

General Administration:

Beginning with page 4 of the proposed budget, Dan said that elected officials would not be receiving a raise. All other town hall employees (contractual and non-contractual) were shown as receiving a 2% raise, with the proviso that this could change depending on how the union contract was finalized. The Highway Department employees were receiving 3.6%, as per their union contract which is in the third year out of a four-year contract. Regarding the Town Hall electricity, budgeted at $45,000 – an 8.7% increase – Dan said they were looking to do something together with the WPCA. The decrease in the health insurance line item (-$9,509 or -2%) was due to the loss of one staff person in the Highway Department, although that cut wasn’t been shown in the Highway Department line item. The Town Attorney line item was cut by $10,000 (-33.3%) and the Town Engineer was cut by $5,000 (-20%).

Going onto the different departments, the Tax Collector’s Assistant (page 4) was being restored to its previous level before last year’s cut, a $4,136.67 increase, or +27.6%. In the Assessor’s Office (page 5), the Assessor Salary was being shown as the full salary of $48,080.76, although that position was generating $7,700 per quarter through the sharing of the Assessor’s services with Burlington. That revenue from Burlington was being shown as $20,000, in case that situation changes. Dan said that the employees in Burlington are unionizing and the status of the sharing of the Assessor’s services may change. With Laura, the Assessor’s Assistant projected to provide administrative assistance to the Land Use Office, the Assessors Office would be manned by both Nancy, the Town Clerk’s Assistant and Debbie, the Tax Collector’s Assistant.

Regarding the Assessor’s position, Board of Finance member Jim Fitzgerald asked: “If Burlington doesn’t need it, why isn’t that role cut by that much?” Dan said that if they cut back, it would be negotiations (with the town employees’ union). Jim asked: “The town has to carry the cost even though the position is not required?” Dan said he liked to think they’d come up with the solution with the $30,000 income pencilled in at $20,000. Reggie Smith asked: “Do you require everyone who works in Assessors’ Office to be certified?” Dan answered that they don’t, that there is a second clerical position in that office.

Dan went on to address the Probate costs (page 5) which had gone up by $1,942.33, a 50.5% jump. “It would have been better to leave it alone.” He said, referring to the recent consolidation of the New Hartford Probate Court into a regional Probate Court in Torrington. The Board of Finance Audit line item was showing an increase of $1,500, +6.3% due to the additional filing that was required due to the USDA financing for the wastewater treatment plant. The Town Clerk’s Office was being kept even with last year.

Public Safety:

Dan next went to the Public Safety section of the budget, page 7, where the Resident State Trooper line item showed an increase of $31,300, or 19.7%. The reasons for this increase were given above. To compensate somewhat for the Troopers’ increase, the town’s Constables line item has been decreased by $8,985.60 (-5.8). This is due to the part-time constable being cut one day per week; he will now be mostly working in the office. Dan said that the Board of Selectmen had recommended making no long-term commitments to the trooper program, that they were required to have a minimum of one trooper. “Put a question mark on the trooper program.” Dan told the BOF members.

The Ambulance Association line item, also on page 7, showed a significant cut of $30,000 (-31.8%). Dan said that was because a recent audit found that they are operating at a substantial surplus (approximately $700,000). He said they had been charging $14.50 per capita when their actual costs were closer to $7.50 per capita. He said he had taken them to a rate of $10.75 per capita. “I don’t want to cause ill-will with the town’s volunteers,” he added. The Ambulance Association wanted to have a new facility and they were trying to put money away for that, he said. There was a discussion with Barkhamsted (which the Ambulance Association also services), Dan said, adding that it was a community issue to be dealt with. Currently the Ambulance Association is using the old Fire House for free. BOF member Dan Charest asked: “You don’t charge rent for it?” And Dan Jerram said no. “It’s a much larger discussion: the Ambulance Association, the Fire Departments – we still have three. It’s a bigger issue…” He said, leaving the subject at that.

Highway Department:

Moving on to the Highway Department section of the proposed budget, page 8 of the proposed budget, Dan said that he had given fair warning to an employee that he will be laid off. He said that there was a possible pending retirement in that department which would have a contractual payout of about $15,000. If there is a retirement, Dan has said in the past that the laid-off employee would be called back. The Highway Wages line item doesn’t show any of this.

Because the town can’t afford to put $100,000 into a new truck under the Capital budget, Dan said he’d increased the Equipment, Maintenance and Repair line item by 20% (9,650).

Next followed a discussion of the town’s roads. Dan said that he’d asked Glasso, a company that had recently done a paving work for the town, to identify roads that needed to be worked on. He said he’d like to use the CRRA money to work on Steele Road and he was told to address that at a later meeting. Regarding the Crack and Chip Seal program, BOF member Laura Sundquist asked how it had gone (this past year) and Dan said it had been a great success, that they had done 13 miles last year and they’d extended the life of the roads by some years. He said over a 6-year cycle all the roads will be addressed. “We have a plan and it’s working!” Dan said, referring to his dividing the town into quadrants and having roads chip sealed in each part of town. “People see the light at the end of the tunnel.” He added. Selectman Tom Klebart said: “We have changed from more paving to more chip sealing. In prior years, a lot less was done – the money was taken out for other things.” “It was a slush fund!” Reggie added.

Planning Development:

Dan said that there were new, younger employees in Planning Development Office (page 9). The Zoning Officer’s salary showed a $15,994.57 decrease (-25.1%) and the Land Use Administrative Assistant was being cut completely. The Legal fees showed only a $3,000 cut (-6.3%). Dan said that Rista, the newly appointed Zoning Officer, is facing a lot of open issues and he felt that the recommendation to fund that line item at $45,0000 was warranted.

Libraries:

The town’s two libraries had requested a $6,000 increase in their budgets but Dan said under the current circumstances he could only give them $2,000 each, equating to a 0.9% increase to the Beekley Community Library and a 4.4% increase to the Bakerville Library.

Health, Sanitation, Welfare:

The proposed budget for RRDD#1 (Regional Refuse Disposal District, on page 11) is being reduced by 3% to $255,000. Dan said that they had contained costs very well. He said this year they would be returning to the town $52,000. Their revenue stream was generated by recycling and the price they get fluctuates, which is why, Dan said, he felt the need to keep the budget number where it is. It was a built-in hedge for them, he said.

Dan Charest said: “That’s a substantial request.” To which Dan Jerram responded that they give the money right back to the town. Selectman Tom Klebart added that the money goes into the town’s surplus and is applied to the next year’s taxes.

Parks and Recreation

Dan said he had spoken to Dennis (Minor, Recreation Director) about making that department self-sustaining. He said the rates for summer camp will be raised, but the beach stickers will remain flat – only for out-of town they’re very expensive.

Debt Service:

For the WPCA, Dan said that $71,000 was reflected on the revenue page. He said he had been working with them on line repairs and he’d requested to use the excess funding (from the USDA grant for the sewer plant) for line extensions.

Commissions And Other Agencies:

All the Commissions and other Agencies on page 14 were being funded at the same level as the current year, with the exception of the Economic Development Commission which showed a 48.3% increase to $15,350. Dan said that he had asked them to be cognizant of every spending initative. “A certain amount is to support existing businesses,” he said, “but they need to focus on future development.”

Capital Expenditures Sheet:

Wing plow: Dan said they had paid (Henry) Bahre $10,000 for wing plow services this past winter. He said they don’t want to have to do that again, so the Board of Selectmen reallocated the $15,000 to begin remodelling the former Probate office into a conference room and put the money into a wing plow for the load grader which is being purchased with money from the CRRA settlement and so doesn’t have any funds allocated to it on the Capital sheet.

Brodie Field House: $50,000 was being allocated for a roof for the building. Dan said that the Highway crew refused to go on the roof (due to its poor condition) and something had to be done. He said that Dennis (Rec Director) believes that the modification of that building could, in a few years, move Rec into a self-sufficient posiiton. It had the biggest gymnasium in town, Dan said. The Friends of Brodie already had the siding and the windows and the United Way wants to come in one weekend and put in the windows.

Brown’s Corner: The sports fields again had $90,000 allocated to it, $25,000 of which was from the Rec Commission’s Capital that had been renamed. They want to modify the parking, put fencing along Route 202, finish landscaping, add a playscape, etc. Reggie Smith asked what the actual cost last year had been and Dan said they had been “within $5,000″ (of the $90,000 allocated) for the playing fields.

Septic System at Brodie Park: Another $25,000 of the Rec Commission’s Capital had been renamed to the septic system. Dan said that in the past Rec had been allocated $50,000 for Capital improvements. “They might allocate some for each of the parks. Now it’s used to better identify the needs.”

Phillips Farm:

A total payment of $150,380 is outstanding, with a credit of $127,454 available in the Land Preservation Fund. There had only been 1 sale (of land from which the taxes are used for this purchase) and they are $16,676.00 short, which would come from the general fund. With a couple more (land) sales, they would be there, Dan said.

Projected Revenues Sheet:

$20,000 had been added as Assessor (services sharing) Revenue, and $71,251 had been entered as revenue from the WPCA for their 61% share of the payment due on the sewer plant (representing just interest payment for the first two years).

The town’s projected revenues, without taxes, was negative $194,649.39.

Capital Reserve Account:

The worksheet was handed out by Annie, the town Bookkeeper. Our reporter did not receive a copy; however, the discussion revolved around whether there was a $62,000 sum unallocated and therefore available to help fund the proposed budget. Annie was asked to have that information available by the next meeting.

By: Maria Moore

At this past Saturday morning’s Budget Workshop on March 12 the two Boards of Ed (Northwestern Regional # 7 and New Hartford Schools) as well as the First Selectman presented their proposed budgets for the upcoming Fiscal Year 2011-12 to the town’s Board of Finance (BOF).  The guidance all three had been given by the BOF was to come up with a budget with a zero percent increase over the current year’s expenditures, or to show how their proposed budget could be cut to a zero percent increase.

Board of Finance Chairman Ben Witte said that if the proposed budgets (two Boards of Ed, the First Selectman’s, and the Capital Expenditures),were accepted as they had been submitted, it would result in a 5.69% increase in the budget for the upcoming fiscal year, 2011-12.   That 5.69% increase, roughly an increase of 1.37 mills, would translate into a property tax increase of $136.50 per $100,000 of the assessed value of homes, clearly not the 0% increase the BOF members had asked for.

Following is our report on the proposed budget presentations of the two Boards of Ed and on some of the discussion that took place regarding each presentation.  Please keep in mind that the workshop was over 4 hours long and this report is a summary.  If you have questions, concerns, etc.  about any aspect of the Budget Workshop or the budgets presented, please contact the members of the Board of Finance, or the members of the two Boards of Ed, and the town’s Selectmen.

Northwestern Regional #7 Budget

The first to present their budget was Northwestern Regional #7.   Molly Sexton Perry, the Chairperson of the Regional Board of Ed, presented the budget for the High School and Middle School; see the copy of the budget we posted on March 11.   The proposed budget represents a 2.37% increase over the current year, an increase in expenditures of $423,854 over the current year, of which New Hartford will be assessed 48% based on the number of New Hartford students attending Regional.

Teachers at Regional have agreed to a pay freeze for this year, the first year of their new contract (look for our upcoming posting of copies of the new contracts for both the teachers and the administrators).  Asked about future increases built into that contract, the Board of Finance members were told that the total increase would be under 6% for the life of the contract.

Part of the  increase in Salaries for Certified staff in the proposed budget, a 3.26% increase over the current year, is due to 5 Middle School teachers having their positions increased from part-time to full-time to service the needs of the 50 additional students that will enter Middle School this coming year.  However, with the High School enrollment dropping, New Hartford will actually be assessed for 1 student less than last year, 520 students versus 521 last year.

Another area of the proposed budget that has seen a large increase is Health Insurance costs, which are $104,000 higher than last year, a 4.99% increase.  Fuel costs are also another area of concern.

Asked if Regional had already adopted the proposed budget, Superintendent Judy Palmer said that they had not, that they would be looking to adopt a budget at an upcoming meeting.

Board of Finance Chairman Ben Witte commented that a 2.37% increase budget without teacher increases seemed high.  He said that if they ask for a zero percent budget then, depending on other pieces (of the budget), there may still have to be an increase.  ”I don’t know how that is sustainable.” Ben said.  He added that the Board of Finance would go to Regional’s March 23 Hearing to give their consolidated feedback.

Judy Palmer responded that she understood what he was saying and that it was a very difficult position for everyone.  She mentioned the large influx of students into the Middle School and the lack of electives at the High School, which meant that students are sitting in study halls instead of taking elective classes.

Board of Finance member Reggie Smith said: “I don’t think that educators are listening to what we’re saying,” pointing to the $423, 854 increase in Regional’s proposed budget.  Fellow Board of Finance member Jim Fitzgerald agreed with Reggie, saying that he was also concerned: “There’s the high possibility that they (legislators) won’t be coming up with savings at the state level, and that they’ll be cutting ECS (Education Cost Sharing) funding.”  Any cuts in ECS, Jim said, would have an effect on both the local schools and at Regional.

The discussion continued and Reggie proposed a motion demanding Regional #7 keep their budget to a 0% increase over last year.  Laura Sundquist said she wouldn’t support a zero budget.  Dan Charest agreed, saying: “I haven’t had any constituents come to me and say we absolutely need to have a zero budget. I’m not seeing that we have to make it a zero budget.”  Roy Lichfield disagreed, pointing out that: “I have had a cut in income.  Many people are going through the same situation, the state is going through the same.”  Another Board member said: ”You have to redefine your system to get to zero!”

Judy Palmer pointed out that they have been working on the revenue side as well.  She mentioned t the increase in the students from China and also in students from Hartland.  They have also opened a program for students aged 18 to 21.

Judy was later asked if she had a list of proposed cuts to bring the budget to a zero increase, and she read a list that was not distributed.

Some questioned whether the workshop was the correct venue for Reggie’s motion.   First Selectman Dan Jerram said: ”Sometimes that motion comes at public hearing. Will there be no further action at the public hearing?”  Jim Fitzgerald responded by saying that the workshop had been published as a public meeting as well as a workshop.  Ben Witte said that ”[I] can’t accept the increase here [but there are] other options. It’s premature to take an official position on this budget.” He pointed out that Regional has a meeting coming up and that they have a public hearing on the 23rd.  Judy Palmer said that they will be adopting a budget at their upcoming meeting, and that will be the budget that will go on.

Reggie said: “It’s a motion of position by me.”  Selectman Tom Klebart suggested a change in the wording of the motion from “demand” to “request.”  Ben agreed, saying the Board doesn’t have the authority to “demand.”  The wording of the motion that was voted on was: “The New Hartford Board of Finance demands that Regional 7 keep their budget at 0% percent over last year: 0% increase to the town over the assessment to the town over the prior year.”

“The intent with the motion is that Regional 7 does not create a tax increase to the town of New Hartford,” Reggie said. Dan Charest asked for his logic. “It’s too high! Everyone else in private industry is getting zero or laid off, getting cuts in pay, wile teachers are given 6-8%, up to 15% with fancy Steps, well in excess to private industry. Have a bone to pick and will vote to bring back a 0% increase to the town.”

Ben asked for a vote on the motion and the motion passed, with three voting for it (Reggie Smith, Alesia Kennerson and Jim Fitzgerald) and two against  (Laura Sundquist and Dan Charest).

New Hartford Schools Budget

The New Hartford Schools proposed budget for the upcoming Fiscal Year 2011-12 was presented by Dr. Philip O’Reilly, Superintendent of New Hartford Schools.  The overall budget was 223,852 higher than the current year’s, which is an increase of 2.95%; see the copy of the budget we posted on March 11.

Beginning with Regular  Ed (page 8), Philip said that there were no increases in certified staff.  The 3.2% increase ($77,150) was due to contractual increases, Steps and change in educational level (to a Masters).  The budget line item shows an offset of $100,712, the balance of the Education Jobs Fund the district received from the Federal government.  The Instructional Assistants line item showed a 45.6% increase ($32,529 increase); there are no new Instructional Assistants being added, Philip said, rather the line item reflects Instructional Assistants that were added after the budget was passed last year.  There had only been one change, that of expanding the responsibilities of the Technical Assistant.  The Regular Ed budget showed an increase of 5.2%.

Moving on to the Special Ed. budget, Philip said this was the most challenging piece of the budget, that there had been a dramatic increase of special needs children moving into the town.  He said no new children had been identified in New Hartford, the increases were purely due to children who had moved from other districts.  They included children with severe needs, autism and other intensive needs.  The teacher in this area had been increased by half, and an assistant had been added. As far as the Director of Special Services, he said the position had been reduced from 5 days to 3 days. The current director will be retiring and the district would be hiring a replacement.

Philip handed out a worksheet to everyone at the meeting showing the additional special ed. costs that the district will incur for the rest of the current school year and next year; everything in red on the sheet were for services for children that they didn’t know they would need. Download a PDF copy of that worksheet: Additional Special Education Costs, 3/12/2011 (104).

As one example of an unexpected cost, Philip said that a family from Torrington had just closed on a house in New Hartford and a student from that family will require a full-year program at Oak Hill School. “This child will cost 440,000 through the end of the school year, and the (full-year program) is estimated at $130,000. Excess costs (reimbursed by the state) will be $59,000, the net is the cost to the town.” Philip said, adding: “We cannot absorb this $40,000 in budget for this year.”

Continuing with the presentation, Philip said the library showed an increase of $12,124 over the current year, most of which was accounted for by additions to Item # 643, Library and Reference Books ($10,000). Technical Support, Item # 112, also showed an increase. Philip said that the Technical Support person was being increased from 4 days to full time to meet the needs of the district. Legal fees, item #314, was being doubled to $40,000 in anticipation of new negotiations with the teachers. In reviewing the Central Office budget, page 21, Philip pointed out that the assistants were not receiving a 4% pay raise (as the figures indicated); the Board of Ed. had given them a 2% raise after the budget had passed last year, and this year the Board was requesting 2%.

The Principals’ Salaries, item # 111, showed a minimal increase of $644, or 0.3%. Philip said that with the retirement of a principal (Kate Rieger) they had lowered what they will pay. Board of Finance member Dan Charest asked: “Has the Board of Ed discussed having one principal and one assistant?” “The Board of Ed hasn’t had that discussion.” Philip answered. “Will there be a discussion about it?” Dan Charest wanted to know. “There has been an informal discussion,” Sue Lundin, Board of Ed Chairperson, said. Bryan Keilty, Vice Chair of the Board of Ed, said that they were looking at Regionalization right now, that it might be premature right now, and that once the report is done, they would look at it (having an assistant principal). Philip made his position on the subject clear: “I don’t believe there is anything more important than a principal. If we are going to maintain academic achievement, [we] have to replace a strong leader with a strong leader. It would be short-sighted for district. As a leader, I would say it’s the worst thing the Board could do.” Dan Charest responded: “I am not saying eliminate (the position) completely. It would be looking at having another structure.” Philip said they should have that discussion, that they wanted to see who the candidates were. “The opportunity is now to have that discussion.” Dan Charest said again.

Philip then presented the Plant Operations portion of the proposed budget to the Board of Finance (page 24). A Board of Finance member asked whether all the heating upgrades had been done at New Hartford Elementary; the item showed a $4,000 amount (page 25). Philip said that the old heating system had never been replaced, that every year they tried to replace where leaks sprang.

Regarding the Heating Oil, item # 692 (page 27), which is projected to be $84,000, $14,000 less than the current year, Philip said it was an optimistic number (based on $2.80 per gallon) and that the district was going to go with the consortium (of other school districts) to buy oil but at this point he didn’t know what number to put in there. He was asked if he knew what oil cost right now and he responded that Quinico had told him $3.20, but it may have receded a bit. He added that he tried to fill the tanks (earlier in the summer) every year but this year he wouldn’t be able to do that.

Looking at Pupil Transportation, items #s 510 to 512 (page 28), which showed a total of $618,110, a decrease of $66,303 (-9.7%), Philip said it was the first year of a new contract and that the rate had been frozen for 2 years. Alesia asked whether there would be an increase next year (2012-13 Fiscal Year), and Philip said there would be an 3.5% increase – unless they cut down on the number of buses which, with enrollment dropping, they might be able to do. Note: The proposed 2011-12 New Hartford Schools budget is the first time the budget is benefiting from the frozen rate in the Pupil Services area although it is the second year the rate is frozen. That is because the transportation contract was renewed after the 2010-11 budget was passed with a higher Pupil Transportation cost, resulting in a $66,303 credit to the school district, rather than a reduction in the budget funded by the townspeople.

The last section of the New Hartford Schools budget proper – other than the Capital Expenditures section which is included in the Town Administration budget – was that of Employee Benefits (pages 29-30). Two notable items in that section are the Medical/Dental Insurance, Item # 201 which showed a $51,499 increase, or 4.8% increase. That amount was offset by a decrease in Unemployement Compensation, item # 214, which decreased by $52,728, or 91.3%. The decrease in the Unemployment Compensation was due to the current 2010-11 budget having increased that line item substantially (from $13,208 to 57,728) in anticipation of the employee layoffs that the budget contained; however, the employees were not laid off due to the district’s being able to fund their positions internally after the budget was passed, resulting in the $52,728 decrease in that line item. A Board of Finance member said they were pleased that the Employee Benefits showed an overall increase of only 0.5%

Reggie Smith asked Philip whether he had asked teachers for concessions this year, and Philip said he had not. Reggie also asked whether there was an incentive for employees to opt out of the district’s health insurance plan, and Philip said that Board had looked at it and it didn’t look like the rationale was good.

Having gone through the proposed New Hartford Schools budget for 2011-12, Philip handed out three additional sheets to every at the workshop, containing information that the Board of Ed wanted everyone to have. The first sheet is a list of cuts/reductions that the district has made in budget items from 2006 through the proposed budget; the second sheet shows the cost per pupil in the school district from 2002-03 to the proposed 2011-12 budget (a rise in the cost from $8,648.72 (in 2002-3 with 654 total students) to $13,135.88 (estimate for 2011-12 with 594 total students); and the third sheet shows historical budget increases from 1997-98 through the proposed 2011-12 budget year. Download PDFs of these three sheets: NH Schools Additional Data Sheets, 2011-12FY Budget (96)

Proposed Capital Expenditures for New Hartford Schools: Board of Finance members then went through the last part of the New Hartford Schools budget with the Superintendent of Schools, Dr. Philip O’Reilly. For ease of reference, below is the Capital Expenditures sheet (draft 2) that was included in the proposed budget.

The Superintendent of Schools Dr. Philip O’Reilly, Superintendent of Schools, started out by saying that there was an additional expense of $16,000 not included on the Capital Expenditures sheet for the replacement of fuel lines at Antolini and because of unexpected expenditures he could not cover that amount himself.

Regarding the replacement of the windows and doors project at Antolini, he said he didn’t have a formal estimate for the job, but he added that in the past the (state) reimbursement had been close to 50%. The roof replacement at Bakerville School had been estimated from $28,900 to the highest bid of $76,500 and the project would qualify for 45% reimbursement. A Board of Ed member asked exactly what the story was with the Bakerville School roof and Board of Ed member Steve Tuxbury said the heating wires had helped in the past but not this past winter. He said there was no ice protection under the roof, and all the roofers who had given estimates for the job had said that it was an immediate project. Reggie Smith said that the roof is a higher priority than the windows and doors replacement. Alesia asked if the Superintendent had talked to the engineers about doing only part of the windows and doors project, adding that when they had talked about it at the Board of Finance meeting they hadn’t had all of the other capital expeditures projects in there. Steve Tuxbury said the windows and doors were important, as were the air handlers. A Board of Finance member brought up the possibility of bonding several of the projects but Steve said the Board of Selectmen hadn’t been very receptive to that idea. First Selectman Dan Jerram said they had just spent a lot of money on Bakerville and guidance (from the BOF) was needed on how much they could do given the economy. They were told to bring the matter up at the next special meeting (of the Board of Finance).

Having finished their discussion of the proposed budget, Reggie Smith proposed a motion for the New Hartford Schools to come back to the Board of Finance with a list of cuts to get to a 0% increase, and also to reduce their capital expenditures budget to no more than $150,000 – to what they had last year, net of any state reimbursement. Jim Fitzgerald seconded the motion. Alesia said she could agree with the first part of the motion but not the second part.

Reggie withdrew the above motion and made another requesting the New Hartford Schools Board of Ed come back with a 0% increase budget. Laura Sundquist said she could not support zero but could support the Board of Ed coming back with cuts. Jim Fitzgerald said he’d like to see zero, but he’d exclude the situation with Special Ed. He suggested having them come back with what they wanted prioritized.

Reggie said they’d requested zero and he wanted to see what would happen (with a zero budget). Dan Charest asked whether the Board of Ed had something already and Philip said that they had a list of things that would be cut if they had to go to 0%. Dan Charest asked: “If they’re prepared to talk about it now, why have the motion?”
Philip left the workshop to make copies of the sheet with cuts on it. Download a copy of that sheet: Reductions - New Hartford Schools, 2011-12 FY Proposed Budget (123)

Having looked over the list of cuts necessary to get to zero, Reggie withdrew his motion. He asked who had generated the list and Philip said he had. Steve Tuxbury said that it (the list of cuts) wasn’t necessarily what the Board of Ed would choose to do.

Having withdrawn his previous motion, Reggie proposed a new motion: “Motion to reduce the New Hartford Board of Ed budget by Boe budget by 223,852 excluding costs of children with special needs not shown on budget.” Jim Fitzgerald seconded it. Ben said that, for his part, they should be doing this at their next meeting. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 3 to 2.

Reggie then proposed another motion: “Motion to cut the New Hartford Board of ed Capital Expenditures Request to $150,000, exclusive of any grant fund reimbursement associated with expenditure.” Roy Litchfield, an alternate on the Board of Finance, asked if he had to be seated (to second the motion and to vote) and he was told that he did have to be seated. The motion was not seconded and so it wasn’t brought for a vote. Ben said they would take action on the budget on the 22nd after their special meeting.

Selectman Tom Klebart who was the former Chairman of the Board of Finance, said: “I don’t understand why you’re making motions now.” Reggie answered that most of them had had the information for three weeks.

The New Hartford Schools Board of Ed budget presentation ended at this point, leaving only the Town Administration budget to be presented. We will report on the Town Administration’s budget presentation in a separate report.

We received a copy of an email this morning which is circulating among the town’s taxpayers informing them of the approximately 5.7% property tax increase which would result if the separate components of the budget proposed at this past Saturday’s Budget Workshop were to be adopted as presented.  Even though both Boards of Ed (Northwestern Regional #7 and the local New Hartford Schools) will be meeting to consider their proposed budgets  again before the Board of Finance’s next meeting on March 22, the originators of the email are concerned enough by the possibility of such a large increase that they are asking the town’s taxpayers to contact members of the Board of Finance to express their concern. Following is a copy of that email:

Re: Property Tax Increase

The budget presented to the Board of Finance Saturday calls for a tax increase of 5.69 % or $ 136.50 per $ 100,000 of valuation on your home.

The typical value of a home in New Hartford is $ 300,000 which would result in an increase of $ 409.50 in property taxes, ($300,000 x .024).

Let’s not forget taxes on Autos as well as the Fire District Tax.

Several BOF members do not think you are concerned because no one has contacted them.

Some BOF members want a ZERO increase in taxes this year.

Please send an e-mail requesting no increase in taxes – This is needed before the next Board of Finance Meeting on March 22.

E-mail addresses for all Board of Finance members:

bwitte@doncasters.com (Chairman)
danlcharest@yahoo.com
jjfitzy@att.net
akennerson8926@charter.net
roy.litchfield@snet.net
wjr_klr@hotmail.com
rsmith@bristolhospital.org
sundquist@att.net.

Please inform other residents of the need to contact the Board of Finance members.

Thank You.

Many Thanks to the Friend of NewHartfordPlus for forwarding us a copy of the above email.

Read the Republican American’s article published today New Hartford Proposes 5.7% Tax Increase.

Our own article on the Saturday morning Budget Workshop will be published tomorrow, Tuesday, March 15, before both Boards of Ed meet.

Judy Palmer, Northwestern Regional # 7 Superintendent, and Dr. Philip O’Reilly, New Hartford Public Schools Superintendent, will both be presenting their proposed budgets for their respective schools.  Below are downloadable PDF copies of each of their proposed budgets.

Northwestern Regional # 7 Proposed Budget

.

The proposed Regional #7 budget for the upcoming Fiscal Year 2011-12 includes total expenditures of $18,409,266, which after applying a credit of $75,000 from the Federal Jobs Fund, , leaves total expenditures of $18,334,26 which equals a 2.37% increase over this current year’s budget.

Download a printable PDF of the Regional # 7 proposed budget: NWR7 Proposed Budget - 2011-12 (108)

New Hartford Schools Proposed Budget

.

The proposed New Hartford Schools budget for the upcoming Fiscal Year 2011-12 includes total expenditures of $7,802,715.00, which equals a 2.95% increase over this current year’s budget.

Download a printable PDF of the New Hartford Schools proposed budget: New Hartford Schools Proposed Budget, 2011-12 (114)

At this morning’s Board of Selectmen Special Meeting First Selectman Dan presented his proposed town budget to the other two selectmen on the Board, Tom Klebart and Bruce Gresczyk.    The selectmen spent two hours discussing the items in the budget and then voted unanimously to approve the proposed budget to be presented at tomorrow’s Saturday morning Budget Workshop being held by the Board of Finance.

Download a printable  PDF of the draft budget: Town Proposed Budget, FY 2011/12 (130)

Staff cuts at both the Highway Department and at Town Hall were features of the First Selectman’s budget. He projects laying one member of the town crew – the one with the least seniority. He said another town crew member may be retiring soon – although no formal retirement request has been received – and in that case the laid-off worker would be rehired.

At Town Hall, the First Selectman proposes cutting the part-time administrative assistant in the Building and Zoning Office. The assistant from the Assessor’s Office will be providing administrative assistance to the Zoning Office, while the assistants from the Tax Collector’s Office and the Town Clerk’s Office will be filling in at the Assessor’s Office. Citing how happy Burlington is with the arrangement of contracting the New Hartford Assessor for three mornings a week which brings in revenue to the town of $20,000 per year, the First Selectman is continuing that arrangement for the upcoming fiscal year. He will be adding GIS mapping to the Assessor’s Office to expand online services that office offers to the public.

Soccer practice at Brown's Corner this past summer. The town's proposed budget for FY 2011-12 includes an additional $90,000 to complete the upgrades at Brown's Corner. Photo from NewHartfordPlus archives

At Tuesday evening’s Board of Finance meeting, the members of that Board discussed the town’s projected revenues for the upcoming fiscal year 2011-12, and they also discussed the proposed capital expenditures for the town and the New Hartford schools presented to them by the Capital Expenditures Subcommittee.   Following are copies of the documents pertaining to those discussions and a brief summary of their discussions.

Projected Revenues For Fiscal Year 2011-12

.

Download a printable PDF of the above projected revenue sheet: Projected Revenues - FY 2011-12 (106)

Projected revenues for the 2011-12 Fiscal Year are for an approximately $150,000 shortfall compared to the current year’s revenues. This is due in large part to the elimination of the reimbursement of manufacturers’ taxes which the state has eliminated. That reimbursement, if it were not eliminated, would bring in revenues of $107,482 for the upcoming fiscal year.

Against this projection of a $150,000 or so shortfall in revenues, Board of Finance members discussed the town’s reserve account which grew last year from approx. 14.50% to this year’s 15.50%. Laura Sundquist said that she believed that towns are required to have a 5% reserve. In the past, when the town’s auditors were asked what was a good level of reserve to have on hand, the response was “10-12%.” All the members agreed that the town’s reserves were too high and that discussed spending some of it to take on a large project – repaving Steele Road was discussed.

Also discussed by the Board of Finance members was the consistently high tax collection rate (approximately 99%) that the tax office has achieved over the past 12 years, versus their assumption of a 96.5% collection rate when calculating the amount of taxes they needed to raise to fund upcoming budgets.

Projected Capital Expenditures

.

Download a printable PDF of the above capital expenditures document: Proposed Capital Expenditures, FY 2011-12 (102)

Alesia Kennerson, who heads the Capital Expenditures Subcommittee, went through the proposed capital expenditures for the upcoming fiscal year.

Board of Finance members agreed that perhaps the New Hartford Schools would not be able to do all of the exterior doors and windows at Antolini in one year. The project was given a price of $315,865. The New Hartford Schools Superintendent was not at the meeting but he would be presenting the schools’ proposed budget at the upcoming Saturday morning Budget Workshop.

Looking at the town’s proposed capital expenditures, Board of Finance chairman Ben Witte said that the proposed Rec expenditures totalling $165,000 was “rich for the economic climate.” Those expenditures include $90,000 for Brown’s Corner to expand parking, trees, fencing and a playscape; $50,000 to replace the roof on the Field House; and $25,000 to replace the septic tank at Berkshire Hall. The First Selectman said he was coming in with a 0% budget which is what the Board of Finance requested, but Ben commented several times later in the meeting that the $165,000 was “rich.”

The Field House at Brodie Park for which $50,000 for a new roof is included in the upcoming fiscal year's budget. Photo from NewHartfordPlus archives

With Saturday morning’s Budget Workshop fast approaching, we will be posting the following information to help set the stage for the upcoming workshop:

• the Board of Finance expectations as communicated to the heads of the three budgets that make up the town’s complete budget;
• a copy of the town’s projected revenues for the coming year;
• a copy of the proposed Capital Expenditures for the town and the New Hartford Public Schools;
• copies of the latest proposed budgets from Regional # 7 and New Hartford Public Schools;
• and hopefully, a copy of the First Selectman’s proposed budget which has yet to be made available but which may be available after tomorrow’s, Friday, March 11,  Special Board of Selectmen meeting to discuss the town’s proposed budget.

Board of Finance Expectations for 2011-2012 Fiscal Year

After the February Board of Finance meeting, Ben Witte, Chairman of the Board of Finance, sent a letter to Judy Palmer, Superintendent of Northwestern Regional # 7, to Philip O’Reilly, Supeintendent of New Hartford Public Schools, and to Dan Jerram, First Selectman, communicating to them the Board of Finance’s expectations for their budgets for the upcoming fiscal year.

The letter tells the three that:

“we are entering another budget season with limited grand list growth,
uncertain state funding and high unemployment.  We trust that your budget
proposals will take these factors into consideration.  The Board of Finance
is requesting that your budget presentation also shows what it would take
to get to a zero percent increase over the current year expenditures. We are
extremely reluctant to raise taxes in these times and frankly, we are
uncertain whether or not we will have the revenue to support level spending.”

Following is a copy of that letter:

The Saturday morning Budget Workshop is scheduled to start at 8:30 a.m. on Saturday, March 12 in the Senior Center at the Town Hall, 530 Main Street. To see a copy of the agenda for the workshop see our Calendar section.