Board of Finance Budget Hearing April 6, 2017

Board of Finance Budget Hearing April 6, 2017

Board of Selectmen Budget

Last year the Board of Finance directed the Board of Selectmen to place many of the Capital Expenditures that did not meet the criteria for bonding, to place these items in the Operating Budget instead of paying for them from the General Fund leading to no increase in taxes. This year the Board of Selectmen’s budget did not address your guidance and has once again skewed the tax increases. Therefore, the Board of finance should reject the Board of Selectmen budget and mandate that they rework the budget to adhere to your guidance. The Board of Finance is the taxing authority and should not accept a budget that is inconsistent with your guidance. The taxpayers deserve a transparent budget and not a smoke and mirrors budget with creative financing.

We can no longer have a myopic view when developing budgets. The long-term fiscal indicators are showing a downhill slide. We now have met a perfect storm. The Grand List was reduced by $20 million, a 1% decrease in revenue. Social Security went up .3% and the Medicare medical insurance was increased eliminating any increase to Social Security. The town medical self-insurance fund was increased by over $1 million due to serious health issues that required additional revenue. I am presently spending over $600 a month in property taxes for a modest home and a 9 year old car. With additional tax increases many residents will be leaving the town. The State has huge deficits leading to diminished revenues coming to the town.

The 7% of debt expenditures aligned to the operating budgets is no longer an appropriate tool for Capital expenditures and should be reduced. The General Fund is being used as a slush fund for extravagant spending to prop up the Golf Course, Performing Arts and many other political entities. As revenues are diminished and expenditures increase, the General Fund which is the savings account is being depleted, leading to a lower bond rating.

The projection that the increase in development throughout the town will increase revenues from building fees is shortsighted. Many of the projects will be phased in long-term and should not be used as a spending tool.

The Economics of supply and demand will determine how many of the approved developments will be developed. Since it appears that the supply is more than the demand, rents will be reduced long-term leading to lower assessments lowering projected revenues.

Assumptions made on increased savings have not come to fruition.

The budget reflects $150,000 expenditure for cyber security. Since all towns are experiencing the need for protection, this is an opportunity for regionalization. All towns would receive more security at reduced costs.

Since more than half of the revenues from the Simsbury Golf Course come from non-residents, Capital expenditures are not included in the Simsbury Farms Special Revenue Fund and $90,000 tax dollars are used for the short-fall, the town should be reviewing the need for contracting out the golf course to a management company as other towns and private clubs have done. The Arnold Palmer and Billy Casper management team has managed many golf courses successfully and gives an added bonus of allowing players to use many golf courses in the United States and else ware. The projections of increased development will increase the population and the need for additional services, increasing operating expenses in the future.

The Board of Selectman budget as presented is a smoke and mirrors budget that I will not support and the Board of Finance should reject.

Board of Education Budget

Simsbury schools have witnessed a decline in enrollment over the years. In 2011 the Board of Education contracted with Peter Prowda to project the student enrollment to 2021.This projection has held true over the years. It states: “I project that the enrollment decline that started in 2006 will continue. By the year 2021, enrollment should be about 3,520 students. The last time total enrollment was below 3,600 students was 1962. The projected 10-year decline is 1,145 students or almost 25 Percent.” The present decline in 2017 enrollment is 873 students. Open Choice student’s enrollment is 165. This is included in the enrollment projections.

In keeping with these projections, when will the Board of Education consider reducing Administrative staff as a prudent and effective budgeting tool?

The school budget reflects a 6% increase in Special Education which I feel is needed from my observations.

As we all have heard,” It Takes a Village to Raise a Child.” The school system is an integral part of the student’s community. Coping skills are as important as the core curriculum. The Special Education Department not only provides assistance to students with chronic health issues but is an intervener to provide assistance to families in crisis

There has been an increase in family violence, divorce, drug addiction, alcoholism, depression, and anxiety, attempted and successful suicides along with other mental health issues in the Simsbury community. Losing a job due to companies downsizing affects families and affects student’s ability to learn. Family health with long-term illness and untimely deaths affect the student. The students affected by these issues need support services by school staff. Many families have received assistance from Social Services in 2016. They have distributed food to 7, 327 people and energy assistance to 209 families. Distractions at home affect the ability to learn in school. The school’s responsibility is to educate the students by helping them cope with issues that affect them on a daily basis. This takes individual intervention in a timely manner and is costly. This is money well spent.

Capital Budget

Many of the $11,460,548 town projects in the Capital Projects should be eliminated or moved to the operating budget. Some of the money is appropriated for studies, plans and updates that could be deferred, eliminated or placed in the operating budget. These are not Capital Expenditures.

The $1 million expenditure for the removal of SCTV from Eno Hall would be greatly reduced if it was moved into the basement of the library where the plans have already been developed for the 2900 sq. ft. of space. This move would leave 1600 sq. ft. of usable space in Eno Hall with an elimination of the need for a $5,800,000 renovation for a Senior Center that does not have a public consensus. The $906,048 library lower level improvements should be eliminated. SCTV’s move to the basement of the Library would be a long-term solution for SCTV and the community and greatly reduce the Capital Expenditures. There is a public consensus for placing SCTV in the basement of library. The Board of Finance should reject these expenditures.

The $22,825,000 proposed expenditure for the renovation of Henry James Middle School should be removed from the Capital Expenditures. The $740,000 for the replacement of the Simsbury High School Tennis courts is a safety issue and should be approved.

In an uncertain financial climate, with the State reducing revenues to the town, the Board of Education’s Capital Expenditures should be deferred for a year until the Board of Finance can develop a strategy to absorb the millions of dollars reduced from the State.

The Town Capital expenditures should be rejected with only safety improvements approved. All the bricks and mortar expenditures that are proposed in the Capital expenditures will increase the debt for 10 to15 years and add to the operating budgets long term. Many of the proposed Capital expenditures should be moved into the operating budgets, not taken out of the General Fund to diminish the tax increase short-term.

With a huge cloud of uncertainty from the State and Federal Government, I am asking that you defer most Capital projects for a year. Maintenance expenditures that are related to safety should be approved.

The Board of Finance should do their job and reject the budgets until the town has an understanding of the State budget and the implications of millions of dollars of reduced revenues from the State. It is your responsibility to guide the Boards through an uncertain fiscal climate. The taxpayers can no longer support a “Field of Dreams.” Do your job!