Supporters of the West River Senior Center (pictured) were one group rejoicing as aldermen wrangled to pass a city budget in the 11th hour. Left to bite the bullet were city unions, which are still mulling over requested concessions.
Pushing close to a midnight deadline, the Board of Aldermen approved a $455.7 million budget for FY2009 late Monday night. The spending plan represents a 2.31 increase over the budget for FY2008. The tax rate will stay even at 42.21 mills — which is really a tax increase for most people, since property values are going up due to a property revaluation.
Aldermen sewed up the budget season at 11:49 p.m. Monday after five hours of debate. Highlights of the evening included: A failed “assassination attempt” on the Peace Commission; four failed attempts to restore homeless funding; a successful plan to keep the West River Senior Center open; restoration of funds to the Fair Rent Commission; and a sweeping debate tackling the question of whether homeless people need art.
“We passed a budget which, if the workforce will cooperate with us, will provide the services people want — police, fire, libraries, public works and the parks,” said Aldermanic President Carl Goldfield, heading home after a final marathon budget meeting.
The budget hinges on $6 million in union concessions that have not yet been agreed to. That assumption spurred some dissent among the board, which voted 20 to 8 in favor of the general fund spending plan.
In the end, amendments passed on the floor dealt with a small fraction of the budget, shifting less than $100,000 between city pots.
“The fact of the matter is no one fundamentally has come up with a proposal that is structurally different” from the mayor’s proposal, Goldfield remarked on his way home. “We’re stuck,” he said, pointing to a property tax system in need of reform.
“This budget is based on hard choices but we are pleased to have been able to balance it without raising the mill rate,” said Mayor John DeStefano, Jr. in a post-vote press release.
Goldfield and DeStefano said they hopedthe unions will pull through with requested concessions. If they don’t, said Goldfield, “we’d have to make serious reductions to our workforce.”
West River Seniors Stay Put
Seniors who lobbied to save their home away from home were rewarded Monday with good news: The board voted to restore funding to keep the West River Senior Center open.
The mayor’s revised budget called for consolidating the West River and Westville Senior Centers by shuttering the West River center and transporting its patrons to Westville by bus. Hearing the news, the West River seniors unleashed a hail of 70 phone calls and petitions to save their favorite hangout. (Click here and for a background story).
One solution surfaced before the meeting — to close Westville center instead of West River. (Click here for a full exploration of that idea.) Hill Alderman Jorge Perez pitched that idea to colleagues on the aldermanic floor Tuesday, but met resistance from colleagues who worried they’d be taking out of one hand to feed the other.
“How dare we pit seniors against seniors?” asked Fair Haven Heights Alderman Robert Lee, one of several dissenters. Lee didn’t offer a solution, but Perez came up with one on the floor.
Perez withdrew his amendment and posed a new idea: Take $32,666.87 from the police salaries attrition line item and use it to keep the West River center alive. The dollar amount is equal to the salary of one position at the Police Academy. One member of the 45-person police academy class has dropped out. Perez argued that in time to come, it is safe to bet that one more person will leave the department, freeing up the funds.
Perez’s amendment passed by a unanimous vote, with one abstention from Edgewood Alderwoman Liz McCormack. Alderwoman Ina Silverman, who represents Westville, was absent from the meeting.
“This is democracy in action,” applauded West River Alderman Yusuf Shah.
“This is great!” said Bobbie Jean Ellsworth (pictured at the top of this story above at right), a former employee at the 30-year-old center. Closing the facility “would have been devastating,” she said.
In the back of the room, Chief Administrative Officer Rob Smuts steamed over the proposal, which he called “irresponsible.”
The police department has already budgeted a line item for attrition, Smuts said, with an estimate of how many police personnel will retire or drop out of the entry class. Smuts, who oversees the police department, said his budget assumes that more people will drop out of the entry-level class than already have.
Smuts also objected to Perez’s coup in taking $150,000 from the fire overtime budget and putting it towards restoring homeless funds — an amendment that passed in a final Finance Committee hearing and was incorporated into the final budget. (Click here to read about that.)
“It is irresponsible to knowingly create a hole in the budget,” said Smuts of Perez. “As a banker, he should know better.”
Fair Rent Restored
The Fair Rent Commission was one group that took a hit in the mayor’s round of budget cuts. The mayor would have completely eliminated the Fair Rent department’s $62,444 budget, including one full-time position. The volunteer commission would have carried on its work under the oversight of the corporation counsel.
Expressing doubts that the corporation counsel’s office could handle the work, Hill Alderwoman Andrea Jackson-Brooks posed an amendment to restore Fair Rent’s funds.
The proposal takes $62,444 from the claims and compensation line item of employee benefits and puts it towards saving the department.
Aldermen Roland Lemar and Alex Rhodeen spoke against the proposal, saying the city should give consolidation a try.
“The cuts have to come from somewhere,” Rhodeen said.
They didn’t come from Fair Rent.
Jackson-Brooks’ proposal saved the department, passing by a 17 to 12 vote. (Voting Yes: Wards 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 19, 22, 24, 26 and 30. Voting No: Wards 7, 9, 13, 14, 18, 20, 21, 23, 26, 27, 28 and 29.)Tweed Hangs On By A Hair
Tweed New Haven Airport fell in the crosshairs again as aldermen made several tries to scrape up more funds for the city’s homeless services.
Amid a slew of slashes in his revised budget, Mayor John DeStefano Jr. proposed cutting $544,000 in homeless services, which would lead to the refusal of shelter beds for adult homeless males. Aldermen restored $150,000 of that funding in the Finance Committee, with some dissenting, arguing the burden should be shared regionally.
In his revised budget, the mayor slashed Tweed’s $800,000 subsidy by $250,000.
Alderwoman Andrea Jackson-Brooks proposed cutting the remaining $550,000 to give to the homeless and lower the mill rate — a move she tried, but failed, to pass in committee. She and others argued the money could be raised by regional partners.
East Rock Alderman Lemar warned of a “dire situation” that could be created by taking away Tweed’s money: The airport could fall back on the city’s lap and incur more debt, jacking up the amount taxpayers have to pay to support it.
Jackson-Brooks’ amendment failed by a 15 – 14 vote. Voting yes: Wards 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 19, and 24. Voting No: Wards 2, 7, 9, 13, 14, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 26, 27, 28 and 29, 30. Sergio Rodriguez first passed on the vote, then changed his vote to no.
The Homeless Quest
In a quest for more funds for the homeless, Perez proposed cutting $28,000 from the Downtown Special Services District, which would reduce the city’s contribution by 20 percent, from $140,000 to $112,000. The amendment failed by a vote of 15 to 13.
Alderman Lee proposed cutting $28,000 from the “Economic Development Cultural Affairs Other Contractual Services” to be given to the homeless. Colleagues and city staff protested that there was no such line item by that name, so the amendment had no meaning. The board nonetheless proceeded in a debate that pitted the arts against the needs of the shelterless.
“Art is shelter for the soul and food for the spirit,” declared Downtown Alderwoman Bitsie Clark. She said it would be “wrong” to take away cultural affairs money, and that all humans need art.
“Last time I checked, [art] can’t put a sandwich in the stomach of the homeless,” countered Lee. “Let’s come to the real world here. You can’t clothe people with art.”
Lee’s amendment failed by a unanimous vote. Even Lee didn’t pipe up to support the measure when the vote rolled around.
East Rock Alderman Allan Brison proposed cutting $260,000 of the Shubert theater subsidy to finance the homeless. That measure failed, too, by a 21 to 7 vote. (Voting yes: Wards 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 17. Voting no: Wards 1, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30. Absent: Wards 22, 25.)
Peace Commission Ducks “Assassination”
Members of the city Peace Commission showed up in force to save their organization’s $3,150 budget from the aldermanic guillotine.
Aldermen Rhodeen, Gerald Antunes, Moti Sandman and Arlene DePino backed a proposal to delete the budget and put the money towards homeless shelters. Their reasoning, explained Rhodeen, was that the Peace Commission has allegedly failed to account for how it spent its budget over the past three years.
Peace Commission Chair Al Marder (pictured, second from right) said he learned just on Thursday that his commission might be under the knife. He said no one had complained of the accounting practices prior, nor given him warning to prepare for the affront.
“It’s a stealth operation,” grumbled fellow peacenik Henry Lowendorf (at right in photo), who charged that the attack was ideologically motivated. “They found an excuse to try to assassinate the Peace Commission.”
Westville Alderman Sergio Rodriguez announced to the board that the commission was indeed in compliance with city auditing requirements, which was news to everyone else, including Rhodeen. The board agreed to keep the funds intact, but to order the commission to produce three years of invoices to show how it has spent its city funds.
After the vote, Marder said the commission “has no quarrel” with the orders given. “We’ll supply them.” The group’s humble budget goes towards membership in the International Association of Peace Messenger Cities, as well as printing costs and travel, he said.
The Final Vote
Budgetary frustration prompted some aldermen to propose other policy changes. Perez said he had sought to eliminate some contractor-employees as a way to balance the budget, but he couldn’t get ahold of the information to inform his decision. So he proposed an amendment asking for a complete list of contractual employees in board of education paid for by city funds. The amendment passed, with four abstentions from aldermen who work for the school board.
With the clock ticking down to midnight, aldermen voted on the final budget. They voted 20 to 8, with 2 absentees, to approve the general fund spending plan as amended. Alderwoman Jackson-Brooks said she couldn’t support the plan, in part because of the $6 million in union concessions that haven’t been firmed up. (Voting Yes: Wards 1, 2, 6, 7, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30. Voting No: Wards 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 11, 12, 17. Absent: Wards 22, 25.)
After some debate, some aldermen who work for the Board of Education announced they were abstaining from the portion of the budget that relates to the school board.
Nothing has really changed if the mill rate isn't going down. New Haven has one of the most egregious taxation in the state for three reasons:
1) Inadequate PILOT funding from state...if they don't want to fund it to the statutory level then they should let us make up our own minds about who an how we tax. Since the LEG won't budge this should be challenged in court.
2) Unconstitutional and unethical merging of commercial and residential property under one uniform mill rate (state mandated). This should also be challenged in court.
3)Mayoral and Aldermanic quibbling about three to thirty thousand dollar items, which is a red herring, distracting us from the real issue... that is the educaton department which gobbles up one hundred and seventy five million dollars per year...37% of our budget. Most obvious...do we really get a quarter of a million dollars of value from the superintendant of schools?