2009-10 Budget Announced

Ken Flatto has announced his town budget for the 2009-10 fiscal year. There are few surprises: once again there is a sharp tax increase and Flatto tells us how small it is; Flatto has reined in the BoE budget request, but only by $400,000. This is the same town that just a few weeks ago voted $165,000 to make a bridge look pretty.

The Post's article makes some startling points:

• '"I could not see how we could go any higher than that," Flatto said. "This [3.07% tax increase is] below the rate of inflation and the lowest tax increase in a decade."' The first thing that jumps out here is that, based on the most recent statistics, 3.07% is certainly far above the rate of inflation. The CPI-U (seasonally adjusted) actually contracted for the 12 months through 12/1/08. The second is that, if 3.07% is the lowest figure in a decade, a decade where the town grew fat off insane Grand List growth, then something is definitely wrong.
• 'The town contribution is needed because late last year the town suffered a $42 million loss in the collapse of the alleged $50 billion Ponzi scheme orchestrated by Madoff.' The town made $17 million in contributions. That is the most they can ever lose. It irks me that people consistently get this wrong.
• 'The first selectman said there are 13 fewer town positions included in the 2009-10 budget, compared to 2008. For 2009, there are 483 budgeted positions, just three more than the town had in 1988, even though at that time, the town was smaller.' It's not like we've grown from a village of farmers over the past 20 years--according to state demographic numbers, Fairfield's gained only about 4,000 people. And note that we're not talking about teachers here, but town staff.
  
• 'And department heads who were supposed to get about a 3 percent increase are only getting about half of that, Flatto said, adding that he put in a 1 percent reduction in the raise he is supposed to receive.' Bravo. The town's in crisis and inflation is practically nonexistent at the moment, but the people at the top still deserve more money. We're supposed to be grateful for the fact that the "more" is somewhat less than otherwise?
  

Lucky for any Grand List growth

Fairfield's 2008 Grand List growth suggests that the next few years might be grim: article

Reflecting the nation's economic problems, the town's grand list of taxable property for 2008 recorded only a slight increase -- 0.5 percent -- over the previous year.

The $11.93 billion list represents a $63.4 million increase over the 2007 figure of $11.87 billion.

The town's grand list had grown 1 percent in each of the two preceding years.

Real estate increased by $74 million, attributable primarily to new construction and new subdivisions in place as of last Oct. 1 [emphasis mine], according to Browne. Residential property makes up 85 percent of the town's total grand list.

"What I'm finding is that what a lot of builders are doing is not finishing off projects," Browne said. "When they get to a certain point, they stop until they get a contract for a sale and then they finish it off."

"Fairfield School Spending Plan Adjusted"

On a 6-3 vote, the Fairfield BoE votes $201,393 in additional funding into its 2009-10 budget. In order to pay for this, the same body agreed to reduce its budget for travel and conferences by $1,000.

Article here

The author notes that, "There was, however, no further discussion of freezing school administrators' pay raises. According to the spending proposal, the raises for 12 top school system administrators, managers or directors total over $62,000. The increases for 2009-10 include $7,438 for the superintendent, $10,381 for the director of operations and $10,054 for the finance director."