Trumbull Town Council Special Session

Trumbull First Selectman Tim Herbst named me the “22nd member” of the Town Council after I made another comment from my personal Peanut Gallery.  Accordingly, I will pretend to be a council member, and intersperse questions and comments on one of the issues the council addressed at Monday’s special session.

The second item on the evening's agenda was a request to approve $78,000 to hire a consultant to determine where operating budgets can be reduced.  Herbst told the council his goal is to “keep taxes stable without sacrificing the quality of education.”  He said the project will be completed “by early fall” and feed into the next budget cycle. 

After a few direct questions and pointed comments by Democrats my elected cohorts approved the expenditure unanimously.  I would have voted “no.”

Can’t We Put $78,000 to a Better Use?

The consultant was selected by a committee of citizens with impressive resumes.  While many thought the committee was formed to deal with the issue itself, they chose to pass it off and let the town pay.

I find it hard to believe this community does not have a sufficient number of potential citizen volunteers with the requisite financial acumen to perform the same assessments – and probably do so better because a well chosen committee will have clearer insights into our budget.  Further, Herbst told the council he looks for “apolitical recommendations,” so economics will rule the day and politics would not become a selection criterion.

The committee selected Gibson Consulting Group, an Austin, Texas based firm “specializing in the K-12 education market.”  Does this give the town side a pass?

To their credit, Herbst noted, Gibson did an excellent job in reviewing background information prior to their interview.  Herbst added that they had been retained by Bridgeport's Board of Education, where they “identified $7 million in specific savings opportunities and included an overall assessment of operational efficiency and management effectiveness.”  The paragraph goes on to say that the firm performed follow-on implementation work.

Does this imply that the $78,000 is but the camel’s nose?  And will the already overburdened school system be required to squeeze any follow-on costs into its budget?

The first opportunity Herbst cited is reducing health care premiums by pooling town and school employees.  This goal predates his election.  It was again discussed two years ago, but nothing was done. 

The issue is what Herbst called “territoriality” by consultants for both groups.  Will Gibson receive their $200 per hour fee to merge the groups if that proves advantageous, or to just determine potential savings and leave the hard work for town and school district leaders who already know the numbers?

Likewise, his desire to combine school and town maintenance is an old idea.  It was scuttled a few years ago by the people directly involved for a reason that doesn’t hold water when budgets are being ground down to their most basic elements.

My Savings Recommendation

As the 22nd member of the council, let me offer up an easy $750,000 savings.  Were decisions being made purely on economics, this would be a no brainer – eliminate residential leaf pick up.  Those most vocal about small government and individual initiative surely know when something should be a private service, particularly when we’re laying off teachers, secretaries and custodians.  But the politics...

Now let me pose a question for the consultants.  The First Selectman said Gibson will look at our schools’ financials and compare our costs to those of surrounding towns and to towns in Trumbull’s District Reference Group – 20 communities across the state with demographics and populations much like ours.

Consider – Trumbull is the 38th wealthiest of Connecticut’s 169 towns.  Yet our schools’ per pupil cost is 108th of about 155 school districts.  What's wrong with this picture?

Suppose Gibson determines that we have fewer administrators per student or per teacher than other schools in our DRG, that our computers are older than average, or that we spend more money on our more needy students than comparable districts? 

Will they recommend hiring additional administrators, replacing computers earlier on, or reducing the curriculum or support services we offer to students who need them most?

Exit the Status Quo Budget

Until the 2012-13 budget Superintendent Ralph Iassogna began each cycle with a Status Quo budget, one that brought forward the prior year’s programs with this year’s contractual costs (negotiated salary increases, e.g.), enrollment changes and new mandates.

But Herbst’s reductions have been so dramatic – over $2.5 million this year alone, when one adds funding the start up of Full Day Kindergarten (not spending $875,000 this year and moving it to next) to actual cuts – that status quo has been replaced by the far smaller Base budget.

The First Selectman focuses on cost reduction, meaning fewer books and less software are purchased, teaching positions at THS were eliminated despite growing enrollment and reading specialists were cut.  The district even has fewer custodians than it did before Frenchtown opened, when it had half today’s floor space – and this before the high school is completed.

Is the consultant just another step in the First Selectman’s pursuit of a Trumbull more desirable to citizens with no children in our schools than for young families, particularly following a year in which taxes will decline for most residents?

I yell “uncle!” 

The third item, another backward step in redistricting, will be the subject of a soon to follow post.

I close with a sartorial note.  Our First Selectman was dressed in a very attractive white shirt with a pale purple window pane pattern and a well matched purple tie.