A 2016-17 town budget with a bottom line of $50.99 million, formally recommended by Town Council vote on April 19, heads to a town-wide budget question referendum vote on Tuesday, May 10.

During budget workshops in recent weeks, Town Council cuts reined in what had been a proposed $51.3 million town budget with a 6.9 percent mill rate increase. The council’s revisions carry a 2.89 percent increase to the tax rate (equaling 0.90 mills), bringing the new mill rate to 31.98 mills (the current mill rate is 31.08). However, most residential property owners will likely see a decrease in taxes next year, based on revaluation notices that assessed many properties lower on the 2015 Grand List.

Residents should multiply the new 2015 assessed value (mailed in late fall 2015) to the proposed 2016-’17 mill rate of 31.98 mills; and most residential properties will find they will have a tax decrease, according to Town Finance Director Anthony Esposito.

When finalizing the budget, in addition to facing increased expense requests, the council had to take into account a $1.2 million deficit that will hit the town in the new fiscal year (July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017). The deficit’s due to a $1 million 2015 Grand List revenue loss from downward trending property revaluations, added to a new debt expense of $248,600 in 2016-’17 for the first payment against $5 million in 2015 bonding (the bonding was mainly to fund road infrastructure improvements).

The council’s work on finalizing the 2016-’17 budget set for the May 10 vote includes an education budget increase of $300,000 in town money and an additional $165,000 anticipated from state-rendered Special Education Excess Funding (expected May 2016), creating a total budget allocation of $465,000 for schools to work with next year. The town’s school district had requested a 2016-’17 annual increase of $1.4 million. The school budget makes up 60 percent of the total town budget.

The Town Council’s cuts to government spending next year affected areas including police overtime and Public Works salt supply, while the council came up with some creative solutions such as meeting a staffing request for a Public Works supervisor halfway with a Jan. 1, 2017 hiring date to cut the $58,000 salary expense in half. The council found a one-time $14,000 reduction in fees by switching to MedCom from CMED emergency communications, reduced contingency funds by $25,000 and reduced the funding for the self-insurance risk corridor to help channel funds to meet budget needs.

Town Clerk Lisa Valenti asks voters to take note that North Branford Budget Referendum Question polls open on Tuesday May 10 at noon and remain open until 8 p.m. (the town’s polls open at 6 a.m. for state and local elections). The town’s voting places are Jerome Harrison Elementary School (District 1) at 355 Foxon Road, and Stanley T. Williams Community Center (District 2) at 1332 Middletown Avenue.

Registered North Branford voters will be asked to weigh in on the Town Council’s decision by voting on the question, “Shall the Town Council recommended budget of $50,998,927, which will require a mill rate of 31.98 mills, be adopted?” Voters can respond by accepting the budget, rejecting the budget as too high or rejecting it as too low.

By Town Charter, a minimum of 15 percent of the registered electorate must turn out for budget referendum voting results to be actionable by Town Council. The last time North Branford voters returned at least a 15 percent response to the Budget Referendum Question was 10 years ago, in 2006. In 2006, 16 percent of the town’s electorate voted down the budget as being too high, following a significant revaluation year that drove up Grand List property values. In more recent years, referendum percentage responses have averaged between about four percent and nine percent, based on issues raised in the budget, usually an increase in taxation. In 2015, facing a 3.88 percent tax increase, at total of 8.9 percent of the town’s 8,785 registered voters came out to vote on the referendum question, with more than 90 percent voting down the budget as too high. However, the budget was passed due to the referendum turnout not meeting the 15 percent response threshold.