New Haven Independent

Posted by: Outta-order | February 25, 2008 4:26 PM

Oh this is such a terrible idea and so lazy on the part of government to attack library services to address their budget. With the literacy problems affecting urban neighborhoods and the long term impact that has on students, I can't believe the Mayor thinks this is a good idea.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | February 25, 2008 4:51 PM

As a tax payer I do not like this at all.....but times are only going to get harder with the national economy. We need to brace ourselves for hard chooses and hard cuts. I will give the mayor a hand for starting to look at the fact that hard chooses are going to have to be made. He can not tax us anymore the middle classes backs are broken and there pockets are only filled with lint balls. We can not afforded it. I do like that he is talking to the unions to.

Posted by: jeffreykerekes | February 25, 2008 4:58 PM

I am one of the people raising the question of overall city spending and looking for places to cut spending due to rapidly increasing taxes. While our recent budget recommendations do not specifically call for reducing libraries, we do ask questions about the number of staff for things like the fire department, the top 100 People at the BOE make an average compensation of $146,000 and other factors.

To cut things from the budget intelligently, we do need to ask what are we getting for our money. I think the changing roles of libraries is a great debate and looking at circulation numbers is deceptive in terms of measuring the importance of a library. I think Stetson supporters would be best served by articulating just the role Stetson plays. Who uses the library, which groups, how many people, how often and at what times? I think this could help define the debate and help decision makers make an informed decision.

For example, when we started looking at subsidies, we found the controversial Tweed subsidy of $800,000 comes to only $12/flight. I think they could raise the fees associated with those flights and eliminate the subsidy. Perhaps looking at the role Stetson plays in the community can inform the hours it is opened, or to even to expand services that are needed and used while doing away with others.

I must admit to being glad to hear the mayor is interested in cutting the budget and only hope he is prepared to look at each of the sacred cows in the pasture.

Check out our website and our budget recommendations and join the conversation.

Posted by: charlie | February 25, 2008 5:03 PM

People in Greenwich are making $10,000 every minute; the Q-bridge is about to go through a $500 million expansion... and yet there are no funds to keep a desperately-needed community center open?

Where are the state's priorities? And why aren't these folks demonstrating in Hartford? That would be much more effective than attacking DeStefano.

Posted by: Hiscoolness | February 25, 2008 5:23 PM

This is a classic "you want tax reductions, then let's shut down the post office" ploy. To which the expected response from the taxpayer is anticipated to be "No, no, Mr. Mayor, please, please, do not close the Post Office. Just increase our taxes by any amount you want, and thank you for your consideration"

Well, these are not the only choices and the choices offered -- reduced police, fire and library services -- provide an insight into the mindset of those who manage $720 million of taxpayer money. We did hear mention about seeking voluntary reductions from the labor force, but our current plight is precisely the result of some very unserious labor agreements entered into as recently as last year.

NO, closing the STetson may not be the right option. But it is an easy one to proffer and one which is expected to generate the expected reaction. Fire houses may need to be reduced if they are not needed and serve no purpose. Police new entrants may need to be reduced if the Police Department can focus on it's core functions of fighting crime and leave traffic, staffing construction sites, etc., to less expensive alternatives.

And there are many other alternatives. The Tweed subside of $800K (more or less) amounts to $12 per private aircraft flight. Private (called general aviation) flghts account for 98% of all 64,000 flight operations in 2006. If the Shubert subsidy were eliminated it would add $6 to the average $43 cost of a performance.

And I await with bated breath the GASB 45 numbers on retiree health care liabilities that were due out last year. I wonder how much will be allocated from next year's budget to fund this benefit?

And the list goes on. And it is depressing..

Posted by: Outta-order | February 25, 2008 5:52 PM

Jeffrey,

Where do you live and what are the literacy rates there? Do the kids in your neighborhood have access to the worldwide web? Can their parents afford weekly trips to barnes and noble or even bus trips to downtown New Haven to study in peace? Even with proof of circulation numbers,you dare ask that a neighborhood on the brink "articulate" the importance of an educational institution?

Posted by: What? | February 25, 2008 7:01 PM

The shubert is subsidized?
That's ridiculous. If someone can't turn a profit on a theater then they don't deserve to run a theater.

Posted by: darnell | February 25, 2008 7:08 PM

The Mayor offered the Stetson library for sacrifice for two reasons:

1. He thought that no one would react, and
2. He clearly doesn't understand the constituency that uses that library daily.

With all the options he is considering, he hasn't seemed to focus on the most obvious, one we all do in our own households when expenditures begin to exceed income, stop spending. Why did the Mayor recently build a $4000 closet in his office in city hall, at taxpayer expense? Why does the city and the Board of Education have to hire another lobbyist in Hartford, after we already have one out of city hall based in Hartford, as well as 7 or 8 legislators who are supposed to work for the city's interests? Is the relationship between the Mayor and the legislators so bad that he can not trust them to look out for the city in Hartford?

Mayor, get out of your ivory tower once and a while and visit Stetson, right in the heart of the black community, before you float trial balloons about its demise.

Charlie,
Aren't you tired of blaming someone else for New Haven's problems. The city apparently is not going to get any more than it is already getting from Hartford, so why don't we climb off that wagon. This guy has been in office for over 14 years, this budget mess is his creation. The Mayor was elected to lead, he should lead us out of this mess, and stop putting the blame on someone else.

CedarHill,

Yes, there should be tough choices. Perhaps the Mayor should return his car, cell phone, high paid staffers, and $4000 closet. Let's start with those choices first, before we begin to close libraries in black and brown communities.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | February 25, 2008 7:19 PM

what about the BOE fluff jobs I have been told about. Not told in detail but these were jobs that were not always payed by the general fund but now are. They are pt over payed positions to constituents. That is were some big money can be cut and I pray some one is looking into it. Also I hear we actually pay for kids to that go to Sylvan Learning Center (just a third party tell) Gee I hope that our tax dollars are not paying for this. The teachers should be teaching!
Good point about the side tracking us, with the whole post office story. You are right! But it does look like we are getting a bigger bone than usual, BUT WE WANT the beef!
Library savers, Maybe there are other groups and programs in your area that get city funding that can consolidate in use of the library or vis versa. Maybe the mayor can make this happen as part of them getting there funding. Were he can reduce there funding and use it to save the library If the programs the library offers can work out of there places. Or vis versa.

Posted by: Gary Doyens | February 25, 2008 8:23 PM

I don't know if this library should be closed. It is a little hard to believe we would close a library so soon after building a brand new one last year over in the Hill section. I rather agree with Coolness that this is nothing but an excuse to raise property taxes even higher and avoid any hard discussion about cutting spending and reducing the size of government - next up will be a plan from the mayor to cut school lunches.

Look, if the mayor was serious - he should put every union, every public employee's health and pension plan in the hands of the state. They have a plan run out of Nancy Wyman's office that would save us millions and millions of dollars.

The mayor should also look at all the double dippers who pretend they're not city employees so they can collect a pension and a consulting gig too. The mayor could cancel every consulting gig at the BOE - unless it is paid for by an existing grant. Hiring should be frozen in non-critical areas and the mayor should cut his own office budget by 10%. Cut the car for the mayor, for Mayo, for anybody else whose job doesn't really require it. There are so many areas where cuts outside of the library could be realized - where real savings could be realized.

I agree with Jeff - I hope there are no sacred cows, no campaign contributors who are spared from a careful and measured analysis as to whether taxpayers should continue funding them.

Posted by: charlie | February 25, 2008 10:46 PM

Superintendent Mayo gets a brand-new $70K SUV gas-guzzler "in case it snows on his way to a school..." (so the rest of us can die in the event his car slides into one of us?) and a $200K salary, and a library gets closed?

Sounds pretty damn fishy to me.

Posted by: Chip Croft | February 26, 2008 12:52 AM

Stetson may not have a high circulation rate but, per square foot, it is one of the most active libraries in the city. I run a youth program there and I can tell you that rather than closing the library it needs to be expanded. It is already too small for the needs of the community.

Also, with the absence of the Q-House, Stetson plays a major role as a safe haven for the area's youth. Every single day it helps to prevent drug use, violence, teen pregnancy and gang activities. Closing Stetson would be a disaster for the Dixwell and Newhallville neighborhoods. The mayor ran last time on preventing violence and shootings and this would totally go against his goal. The Q-House cannot be closed and the downtown library is not a safe option for the youth of the area.

Posted by: Chris Gray | February 26, 2008 1:16 AM

Since, along with our parks, our libraries are most close to my heart, I am tempted to pull out my library stories. That, obviously, is unnecessary.

Suffice to say, when the downtown branch's copy of the film "Amistad" was stolen, it was available at Stetson as was a meeting featuring State Senator Martin Looney since he was campaigning for Mayor there when I dropped by to borrow the tape.

Note that the current Mayor specifically identifies New Haven Independent coverage of critics of his budget, by which he most likely means the constant hammering he gets in these posts as well. He's peeved.

The pettiness he exposed in that debate from his first failed run at the Democratic nomination, the "Empty buildings pay taxes!" rant, has resurfaced and, perhaps, floating the Stetson threat is payback for that Looney meeting.

(Nah; Looney probably held meetings in every branch.)

Still, don't tell me that that election being held on September 11, 2001 didn't result in a tragedy in this city as well as in New York and whatever town the damnable Pentagon is located!

(I noticed, on Yahoo News headlines, just before coming to this site that they still haven't produced those vaunted bomb resistant Bearcats they were promising our soldiers.)

Posted by: jeffreykerekes | February 26, 2008 7:36 AM

Outta-Order:

I think you may have misread my post. I said I think relying on circulation numbers alone (which to my understanding, is one of the measurements being used to assess the use of the library) is a mistake precisely because people are using libraries in new ways all across the country. People are using the internet for job searches, homework assignments, entertainment etc... People also use it as a community center etc... I think that if the city is going to measure the importance of a library, they need to look at is full role in a community. "Chip Croft" detailed exactly such reasons. My library branch is the main library.

I agree with previous posters who says closing libraries may be a distraction from making more serious cuts and I think the city finances are in a pretty scary place. We are in serious debt in a climate with shrinking tax rolls (foreclosure properties are well over 1000), with shrinking PILOT money for all the non-taxable nonprofit property(at about 43% instead of about 70%), money going to Iraq instead of States (then to cities), escalating healthcare, labor contracts, retiree benefits and many other costs.

In such a climate, where are we going to cut? Check out our draft document with suggestions. We want more suggestions. We desperately need to be having this discussion as a whole community. We can also work on lobbying the state for full funding of the PILOT dollars given 43% of our properties are not taxable. While pursuing more money, we cannot ignore making cuts to spending.

Anyone out there reading this, if you have specific details on wasteful city spending, patronage, pay-backs, corruption, illegal activities, insider deals, We want to know.

Can the NHI investigate this claim about the Anthem Broker and about the ability of the City to join the State's bulk purchase health plan?

Posted by: True New Havener | February 26, 2008 9:41 AM

I read the anti-tax proposals in the draft document.

They demonstrated a lot of work, but they are so misinformed that they would do more harm than good.

Here's some examples:

They propose consolidating elderly services, youth services and community services for better efficiency. These are in fact all consolidated and answer to one boss. This has been the case for some time. Looking at the budget documents alone you would not know that but it is the case.

They similarly propose consolidating city plan, building department, and economic development. They are consolidated and have been for a dozen years now. This happened for better management and increased efficiency a long time ago.

They want to somehow move the board of ed under the mayor because he has appointing authority. Two issues: not sure how this would save a penny and by state law, this would be illegal. There needs to be a separate board of education (in New Haven the Mayor appoints it by charter -- in other towns it is appointed, elected or hybrid) under state law and its budgets again by state law may not be dissected by the local board of aldermen. They may only vote up or down. There are good reasons for this even though it may not always deliver desired results.

It goes on and on. The net result is that I don't see where any money is saved, with the exception of subsidies to the arts and economic development. No doubt good arguments can be made (and are each year) on both sides of whether supporting the arts and economic development are a good thing. It does seem that the Shubert is a boon to the downtown and well worth the investment. And is there a trolley subsidy? I thought that was paid for by a fee on parkers in lots (the kind of thing you call for elsewhere).

There are no easy choices and the people on the board of aldermen and in city government are not all a bunch of mindless Mayor following idiots. While I often disagree with the decisions they make, I think they take the tax issues seriously and try to find ways to cut. They balance this with the need to stop kids from getting shot, have a viable city, inspect buildings and keep libraries open. I don't see how this document actually provides them with any real and/or new ideas for cost savings.

Ideas on union re-negotiation will likely go nowhere unless members believe that layoffs are imminent. In that case, some flexibility may be found. This is not to disparage the unions -- they see their job as protecting workers' wages and pensions so their consistent position on this is logical.

As the workforce ages and retires, and health care costs continue to skyrocket, that is what drives increased costs. Unless this is addressed, our shared grumpiness on tax rates will only continue. Maybe someone has a good idea on how to solve this. My sense is that it is a big part of the Presidential race going on now and will only be solved at that level.

In the meantime, Yale has so much money that college is now free for anyone making under $200,000 and they are so wealthy precisely because the city cannot tax them -- interesting. How large would Yale's endowment be if they had to pay property taxes each year since arriving in New Haven? How big would the city's budget gap be?

Posted by: king james v | February 26, 2008 9:45 AM

Why don't we get the talented and very busy Alderman Morehead to benefit his time and talents and put together a fundraiser for the library his constitants use, apparently he's got enough time to pop into letterman, the least he can do is take care of his own first. If he truly is a man of his people, then i'd have to think this is a no-brainer for him.

Posted by: jeffreykerekes | February 26, 2008 12:22 PM

Dear True New Havener:

We appreciate criticism and dialogue about our document. We tried to keep the size of the document small enough to get people to read it. There are areas we did not expand on for size and we appreciate the opportunity to expand on some of our recommendations. We are not specifically anti-tax but rather being more efficient with the funds we are using, paying for our debts and obligations as well as against continued significant tax increases (perhaps just semantics, but a difference).

The community services that are consolidated as you note still run with Executive Directors running each of the services. We therefore are perhaps to top heavy (and expensive) for running services under the direction of an administrator such as CSA.

The proposal for consolidating city plan, building department, and economic development (which you note has taken place years ago) is because they appear to be working at cross purposes. The draconian parking tickets discourage people from driving in to do business/shop/eat/visit New Haven. We have building permit fees that are in far excess of the cost to administrate and supervise this development. We then go and spend a lot of money to market the city, and spend more on trying to recruit businesses. These contradictions seem to work against our stated purposes and seem to lack a unified mission and purpose.

Regarding the comment on the BOE and the Mayor. The BOA is held responsible for BOE but has no authority. Responsibility without authority is a charade. The only person who has any authority over the BOE is, by current design, the Office of Mayor. This may not save any money today, but will focus the responsibility more acutely and accurately. Therefore, if people have problems with Education, they can focus their accountability with candidates for Mayor or on Charter Reform. Changing Education is a long-term issue which will need accountability to the people.

You comment:

"It goes on and on. The net result is that I don't see where any money is saved, with the exception of subsidies to the arts and economic development. . ."

Some of the recommendations we made have dollar values attached such as $2.5 Million in Subsidies, $257,000 in duplicated services. Many of the recommendations do not have dollar values attached since those would require negotiations such as Fire Department staffing levels, EARLY retirement healthcare subsidies (waiting on the GASB 45 report for the multi-million dollar liability for this) as well as others. Another major call in our document is to get better data into the public domain about where the money is going such as what do we get for $62 Million in rentals and services every year. The budget document itself makes it hard to decipher what is actually happening. Important cost center expenses are allocated in other centers making it hard to know what is being spent where. We might be able to point out and advocate for better cost savings through more transparent information in the budget.

Do you have any specific recommendations? You mentioned getting more money from Yale. Do you have any specific recommendations on how the City may move forward with such a proposal? Are you able to work on developing a proposal on this? I am curious about the actual expenses Yale costs the city. Some areas worth calculating would include, number of fire department, police, ambulance responses. The number of children attending NH Public Schools who are living in tax-exempt properties owned by Yale. Other costs to consider include public works (street cleaning, snow removal, sidewalk repair, if any), Waste Water and drinking water costs (if any). Another interesting tabulation would be the gap in PILOT funding attributable to Yale. I know this is a State issue, but it would be worth calculating the difference between what the State promises and what it actually pays that is related specifically to Yale. Whether we would/should/could hold Yale accountable for any or all of this is one question for debate. Perhaps we should hold Yale accountable for this gap funding to any new properties taken off the tax rolls for new tax-exempt properties (would this apply to the new residential colleges being planned)?

I almost didn't comment on this part: "They demonstrated a lot of work, but they are so misinformed that they would do more harm than good." However, I stand by the document, accuracies and inaccuracies combined. I believe the only harm that can come from a debate and community learning about these issues is for any debate to be stifled. We welcome corrections, clarifications and additions to make the document clearer and more accurate. Thank you again for the feedback.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | February 26, 2008 12:22 PM

OK CEDAR HILL IS ON BOARD NOW!!! They JUST CUT OUR PLAYGROUND!!! THANK YOU TOWN HALL. Will do a story with pic's in a few days if Paul will post it. They are so not want to cut the jobs of those BOE people! Libarys Playgrounds! I pray that the things the buget is spent on are not useless things in communitys that do not need them!!!!!!!

Jeffery has post the dates and times of all the budget meeting everyone that want to go and has something to say needs to go to all of them I WILL BE!

Posted by: jeffreykerekes | February 26, 2008 12:28 PM

The mayor will be speaking Thursday Night about the budget at the Main Library. Full schedule below:

============================================================
Mayor's Budget Tour:
============================================================

Thursday, February 28th at 6pm at the Main Branch of the New Haven Free Public Library on Elm Street.

Thursday, March 27 at 6pm, St. Aedan's Church Hall 112 St. Fountain Street in Westville

Wednesday, April 9 at 6pm, Pilgrim Congregational Church Hall- 65 E. Grand Avenue in Fair Haven Heights

Thursday,April 24 at 6pm St. Bernadette Church Hall 385 Townsend Avenue in the Annex/East Shore

Posted by: charlie | February 26, 2008 12:33 PM

Jeffrey, those are good questions about Yale but the answer is that none of those things you mentioned cost the city money. Yale pays the city for fire services and many other things, in addition to paying for water and electricity and making millions of dollars in "voluntary payments" to the city just because they are nice. Yale is the largest taxpayer, and the new developments going on at Yale are not removing taxable properties from the tax rolls -- if anything, any increased development at Yale (e.g., taking a small classroom building and replacing it with 10-story buildings) will be contributing hundreds of millions of dollars to city coffers (through PILOT) that wouldn't otherwise be there. To say nothing of the increased base of stable jobs -- jobs that are easily better than those of any other employer in New England -- that are created when Yale hires more people. Yale has also agreed to increase its "voluntary payments" over the coming years.

If the city attempts to tax Yale (which it has already done, in fact, by introducing ridiculously high building permitting fees, which incidentally -- as you yourself point out -- is incredibly dumb because it ends up discouraging private investment across the city, not just at Yale), even though Yale is already paying more to its host city than any other university does, Yale will probably just respond by moving more of its facilities out of town. Just like it is doing right now with its billion-dollar future investment in a new campus in West Haven. I don't think that's what anyone in New Haven wants.

Posted by: Hiscoolness | February 26, 2008 12:36 PM

True New Havener: We appreciate your comments and feel no need to defend everything we wrote. Your corrections and amplifications are welcome and will be noted.

Our key message is that with personnel costs accounting for 64% of the General Fund, we must focus here. This may mean renegotiating compensation packages, defining realistic staffing levels, etc., if we wish to avoid tax increases to pay for this. The standard objection is that this cannot be done without arbitrators intervening and deciding in favor of union proposals. Why don't we try to do this and make clear to the public why those extra mils had to be tacked on to the tax bill. And yes, someone has to make clear that we either eliminate unnecessary personnel and excessive compensation packages or ask the taxpayer for more.

Your other comments are noted. If the elderly, youth and community services are already consolidated then we misread or misunderstood the budget. Has the consolidations resulted in any streamlining of services or any reduced overhead? If so, they have achievement their objectives.

City Plan, Building Department and Economic Development are already consolidated? Again, this is good news. Are they more effective this way? Why then the need for the new Economc Development Corporation with Yale funding and sponsorship? Is something missing in terms of effectiveness from the existing departments?

RE the Board of Ed. No money saved, just more transparency so it is clear who is responsible for this function and it's level of effectiveness.

On subsidies, we point out that these subsidies -- Tweed, Shubert, Trolley -- are just not necessary nor productive. Households earning less than $30,000 are paying to support the $43 average price of a Shubert ticket by about $6, or the private aircraft flights by an average $12 per flight. Is this necessary? Fair? And the trolley subsidy is still paid by the taxpayer -- routed via the increased parking fees we pay the parking garages who have to pay the tax.

WE really do not want to quibble since all comments help us refine our understanding of where the money goes.

Posted by: Darnell | February 26, 2008 12:39 PM

CedarHill,

I am glad you crossed over from the Dark Side to the Light. May the Force be with you (and that playground).

Posted by: True New Havener | February 26, 2008 12:58 PM

Jeffrey and rest of the anti-tax crew,

While I do think your suggestions are remarkably off base, I think your tone is exemplary in response to my comment.

Hopefully that will continue and thus when you do have a viable idea, it will get listened to.

Posted by: NHStudent | February 26, 2008 1:29 PM

I am a student here in New Haven I feel like that why take away a place that helps our students better themselves and keeps them out of the streets? To me it doesn't make any sense at all and being a minority in this city is pressure itself. I go to the Library myself even if it is not the Stetson Library, but put yourself in the shoes of a teenager who goes to the Library to use their resources for our school work. Not everybody has access to the internet at their home, or the proper books for their school work.
It seems so wrong for somebody to even consider to take away a institution that helps and aids people who need it, that is just like taking away a school just to raise a budget that doesn't seem to be used to help better this city at all. What does that ultimately say about the Mayor himself, only that he is selfish and greedy for money. I personally disagree with him taking away something that helps many people of all ages and ethnic backgrounds. How would you feel if somebody said that in order to increase their budget they would need to take away the building in which you work or shut it down for good?
I just wished that before making such drastic decisions like this that he would realize that taking away this Library is taking away or limiting their dreams because of somebody who is so greedy for money wanted more and didn't care about the PEOPLE IN HIS CITY.

Posted by: charlie | February 26, 2008 1:39 PM

If the Mayor and City Clerk (what does he do again?) gave back 25% of their recent raise, and top administrators were given a salary cut of 0.5%, and the Superintendent sold off his 10MPG gas-guzzling $70K city-paid SUV (see above), we could easily pay to keep the library branch open and even expand hours across all the branches.

Where is the citizen outrage over this?

Posted by: Sunday | February 26, 2008 3:02 PM

Why build all of these new schools and now close a library that the neighborhood need. Will someone in City Hall learn how to balance the budget.

Posted by: jeffreykerekes | February 26, 2008 3:19 PM

Charlie, Chris Gray, True New Havener and other regular posters here. Please help us refine our recommendations and advance an agenda that can be supported and implemented. Call me at 203-676-0880. I am happy to meet for coffee to discuss whether you want to get more involved. I would like to see more people get involved and perhaps a brief meeting is the first step to you lending a hand to change. Thanks.

Posted by: wait a minute | February 26, 2008 6:27 PM

I urge everyone to attend as many of the budget hearings as possible. You'd be surprised as what you see and hear. People should also go to City Hall and request copies of the proposed budget. I pay my house and auto taxes on time(I'm doing my part) the City's collection rate for taxes is second to none. There's less money coming in from the Federal Government to the State and less from the State to Cities. This has been the norm for the past five years. Get over it and stop passing the buck.Stop spending money on non essential needs (4,000 closets)and balance the damn budget. Most New Haven residents do it every day!

Posted by: Chris Gray | February 27, 2008 2:41 AM

Charlie,

O.K, I've been out of town and out of touch for nearly ten years but I think I'd have noticed if Yale had so greatly increased its so-called voluntary contributions to the city.

Last I remember, the city (under, I believe, the leadership of former Alderman Marty Donleavy - now a Dem superdelegate) got it to pay for its fire service by trading that for a ridiculously low price for the part of High St. (the very first street layed out in the city, it was reported then) they turned into an extension of Cross Campus.

As you challenged another poster in another very recent thread, do you have the facts and figures to back up your claim that they are "paying more to its host city than any other university does"?

Do you really think it is "just because they are nice" or could it have been under pressure of a campaign slogan such as "Tax Yale Not Us!" Not to mention the national press they got over the murder of Christian Prince.

Also, on those promises of increased voluntary payments, I've heard plenty of their promises and then noted how they welched on them while the amnesiac city fathers and media failed to hold them to them.

Hey, I realize we'd be another Bridgeport or Waterbury without them, but the closed Q House and the threatened Stetson library branch are just a few blocks down the street from the Yale Bookstore. Don't they worry what lost visitors for Parents' Weekend or graduation might think?

Posted by: charlie | February 27, 2008 10:09 AM

Chris, an excerpt from Yale's "voluntary payment" letter to the city FYI:

Yale University is one of only a very few universities that make a voluntary payment. Our payment to New Haven is the single largest voluntary payment made by any university to any municipality anywhere. For comparison, the University of Chicago and Columbia have many more students, but neither makes a voluntary payment.

In the last 15 years, the voluntary payment made by Yale University to the City has gone up 247%, while the City budget has grown 53% and City tax revenue has gone up 31%.

This FY2008, Yale University made a voluntary payment to the City of $4,385,663, compared to a FY1993 voluntary payment $1,263,720. Over the past 15 years, the voluntary payments made by Yale University to the City totaled $37 million. Over the next 15 years, Yale University will make voluntary payments over $85 million, using conservative estimates.

In the last 15 years, the building permit fees paid by Yale University have grown enormously, as the City has increased rates a number of times and the University has undertaken more construction. In FY1993, the City collected $1.9 million in building permit fees. This FY2008, it expects $8.2 million, an increase of 331%, while the City budget has grown 53% and tax revenue has gone up 31%. Yale University pays over half of all fees citywide. The growth in permit revenue exceeds growth in expenditures for City building inspections.

With it's the latest increase in permit fees last year, the City now takes 2.5% of project construction costs. Yale University is the largest payer of these high building permit fees and pays vastly more than peer institutions, whose cities either take much less or charge no fees to universities. Harvard pays a 1% fee. Columbia and the University of Chicago pay nothing.

In the last 15 years, PILOT payments from the State to the City for colleges and hospitals have gone up 151%, while the City budget has grown 53% and tax revenue has gone up 31%. In FY1993, the City received $15.3 million from the State in recognition of the nontaxable property of its four nonprofit colleges and hospitals. In FY2008, the City has received $38.7 million, the majority due to Yale University property. This growth comes from the State's increase in PILOT funds overall and the increased value of Yale University's campus due to construction and renovation on property we have long owned.

Connecticut is virtually unique in making PILOT payments in recognition of nontaxable university property - the only other state with PILOT is Rhode Island, whose reimbursement rate is substantially below that enjoyed here.

In addition to multi-million dollar annual payments to City government, Yale University further makes substantial financial contributions to our hometown through efforts such as the homebuyer program, funding of the new city economic development organization, and sponsorship of youth education and recreation programs, Market New Haven, the International Festival, neighborhood development initiatives, and numerous other civic contributions.

Posted by: WEBblog 1 | February 27, 2008 4:02 PM

Charlie,

From your post of Yales contribution analysis, it appears that they too are saying the city spends too much!!!!

Posted by: charlie | February 27, 2008 5:07 PM

Isn't spending more than you have "too much"?

The solution is simple: raise taxes, cut spending, lobby for redistribution of wealth (e.g., get the state and feds to change tax loopholes/Bush taxcuts so that the ultra-rich aren't keeping all of the $10,000 per MINUTE that they make in income, while paying no taxes on it), make the city more desirable (by, for example, sending all violent criminals away for minimum 90 year prison terms without parole, and giving out $1000 tickets for aggressive driving)... or a combination of all of the above.

Posted by: RealEconomy | February 27, 2008 6:39 PM

It is good to see NHI and NHCAN and others get more and more facts out and about on the budget. More facts are good, and the state compiles exhaustive comparative facts in its Municipal Fiscal Indicators, most recent published in November 2007 and available @ http://www.ct.gov/opm/cwp/view.asp?a=2984&q=383170&opmNav_GID=1807

Data on page C-19 show that New Haven has a relatively high mil rate, but lower (by a lot) than Waterbury, Hartford, and New Britain. Our city is lower also than Bloomfield, Woodbridge (yes), and Meriden.

Data on page C-17 show that New Haven has very low taxes per capita -- the 155th lowest taxes per capita in the state (see final point below for an important companion piece of data)

Data on page B-9 show that New Haven has very high debt per capita, though.

Another good source of comparative data are the town profiles collected by CERC for DECD, available at http://www.cerc.com/townprofiles.html

The New Haven profile shows that subsidized housing makes up 29% of all housing units in the City, a rate 3 times higher than the state overall. Therein lies an important dynamic that may be politically less-than-correct yet is factually key. The city both by choice and because of external forces has a large fraction of housing that generates little revenue while generating substantial service costs.

It means the other 2/3 of people pay more to carry the whole, so while the per capita taxes are low (155th lowest in the state!), the burden is shared unequally -- homeowners pay more in and get less comparatively in services; subsidized housing pays less and gets more. At its most extreme, not that only New Haven of all towns in Connecticut spends its own taxpayers' dollars on shelter on demand, available to anyone homeless from anywhere.

Everyone should make their own judgment on what's good, bad, or indifferent in all this for policy and budgets, but can all agree that more facts is worthwhile, and it's wonderful that the NHI and more citizens are doing that. Keeping libraries strong is important to citizen information and involvement - citizens without home computers rely on Stetson and other libraries to read the Independent!

Posted by: Chris Gray | February 28, 2008 3:40 AM

Well, shut my mouth, literally, Charlie!

I guess President Levin is no Benno Schmidt and no Bart Giamatti, not to even mention former Acting President Gray.

You ever heard of "The Lost Weekend"? Well, meld that with "Rip Van Winkle" and that poor, elder Japanese soldier who was still fighting World War II many years later and you have an inkling of where I am at right now.

Guess I spent too much time in the old Park Shoe Repair shop back in the '90s.

Thanks for the update.

Posted by: UNREAL | February 28, 2008 6:52 PM

We have a mayor who clearly is out of touch with the every day people who struggle in this city, and have a mayoral candidate who has decided to run for office with more skeletons in his closet then our last governor.

This is a joke...

Posted by: Chris Gray | February 29, 2008 2:28 AM

O.K., I shook it off.

So, Yale voluntarily contributes a little more than 1 percent of our annual city budget.

Meanwhile, it physically dominates our downtown, dictates much of the development of that area (they made sure that shoe repair shop closed and was eaten by machines - I watched) up to and including what can be sold and what hours businesses must be open in properties on which it actually does pay taxes.

It hassles business owners who don't show proper deference to its officials or outright runs them out of business if they foolishly hire outspoken critics, like myself, or let a Princeton grad run it, even if they offer that deference during business hours. (You may remember when they arranged to have Broadway torn up during the Co-op's final dismal Christmas season on Broadway, before they lowered the boom.)

Sure, they are all heart.

So R.I. and CT are the only states with PILOTs? Then all those other states with elitist, multinational educational/medical corporations masquerading as public services deserving of non-profit status really ought to rethink their positions or our states should rethink whether we should subsidize them with that status.

As I said, the Q House is just down the street and that lousy 4.4 million bucks just looks puny in the face of the problems.

Not that any of our political leadership helps with their spendthrift priorities, shell-games and incompetence. Does anyone really believe the Clintons solved the budget deficit and that their surplus would have materialized? Was Bush the cause of the dot com bubble burst?

Posted by: outcast | March 1, 2008 10:12 PM

This is the time where the real leaders need to stand up for the children of our community and fight for the people who have voted them in by keeping the library open.

We currently have 12 black alders,5 spanish alders, possible 2 jewish alders who are concidered a minority and I can't see why in the H_ _ _ are they allowing our Mayor made a decision to close down one of the most used libraries that is used by our Africian American children.

People you have to make a change and get these people out by selecting a Democratic Town Commitee person to represent you by not choosing these a _ _ holes to get back in office.

I agree with the other writer, why did they build a new library and now is closing one of the most used libraries in this city.

I blame all of the people in the City of New Haven for putting these robin hoods in the hood and in City Hall.