This is a printer-friendly version of an article from Zip06.com.
05/01/2018 12:00 AMOver the course of two meetings, the Board of Finance (BOF) heard public comment and then ultimately voted to send both the town and Board of Education (BOE) fiscal year 2018-’19 budgets to referendum on Tuesday, May 15. At a special meeting on April 30, the BOF unanimously approved both budgets, including a controversial cut to the library’s budget, to be put before the voters for final approval.
Together the town and BOE budget is $83,067,202, an increase of $1,181,588 or 1.44 percent from last year’s spending. The BOE budget is $58,103,711, representing a $1,184,506 or 2.08 percent increase in spending. The town budget is $24,963,491, a decrease in spending of $2,948 or 0.01 percent compared to last year.
For this 2018-’19 year, capital expenditures are set at $3,211,906, keeping operating funding completely flat from the prior year, but the BOF has indicated it will infuse the Capital Improvement Program with money from the undesignated fund balance as well to maintain program funding.
The proposed budget, if adopted, is anticipated to lead to an estimated 0.74 mill rise in the mill rate, from 27.30 to 28.04, a 2.71 percent rise; that figure is based on early assumptions on state funding and other variables.
The Board of Selectmen (BOS) has also recommended to the BOF that the estimated tax collection rate stay at 98.75 percent and that the BOF use $400,000 from the undesignated fund balance to offset the mill rate increase.
The budget before the board on April 30 maintained the $300,000 cut to the library operating budget for the coming fiscal year. Board member Bennett Pudlin made a motion to try to pass the budget with a restoration of $200,000. Pudlin said he didn’t think the cut was driven by a financial imperative, but his motion ultimately failed, with Jean Fitzgerald (R), Mark Casparino (R), Ken Kaminsky (R), and Kevin Kranzler (D) opposed and Bennett Pudlin (D) and Judith Friedman (D) voting in favor.
Friedman then made a motion to approve the budget with a restoration of $100,000 to the library operating budget, saying the amount would be a good compromise, but her motion also failed with the same vote.
The board then unanimously approved the BOE and town budgets with the full $300,000 cut to the library.
Prior to the vote, Scranton Memorial Library Board of Trustees President Beth Coyne thanked the board for listening to library supporters. She said the BOF treated the library with respect and apologized if some library supporters had not shown BOF members the same courtesy.
“I want you to know tonight and I am glad to say this before the vote, no matter what happens and even if I don’t like the vote, I intend to vote ‘Yes’ to support the budget that you put forward at the referendum,” she said. “I do not believe the issue we have with our library budget should impact the rest of the departments who are served by our town budget. Referendums are expensive and a failed budget referendum is not good for our town.”
Coyne’s statement about respect addressed the tenor of recent discussions around the library cut. Comments at the April 26 second budget public hearing varied in tone and civility. After the meeting on April 28, the Facebook page Protect Scranton Library Funding addressed the issue: “We truly appreciate all the support shown to the library during this budget process, but we also ask that if you are writing emails or speaking publicly with our town officials about the library budget that you do so courteously and respectfully,” the post read. “Personal attacks of any kind against our elected officials or their family members are unacceptable and hurt our cause. Thank you.”
The Public Hearing
The BOF held its mandatory second budget public hearing on April 26 to review the proposed town and BOE budgets with the voters. BOF Chair Fitzgerald highlighted the key features of each operating budget, including the major cost drivers, and discussed the BOF’s approach to budgeting.
Fitzgerald said as state aid continues to rapidly decline (the town projects a 90 percent drop in aid in the coming fiscal year), the BOF has been working on a plan to make the town completely independent from the state in three to five years.
“We didn’t want to have spikes in taxes,” she said. “We wanted to create some stability to your taxes and we wanted to create some understanding of what you will be expected to pay. We know that the state is unpredictable, we know that the federal government is unpredictable, so we felt it was our obligation to try and work toward a forecasting plan to make things more attainable for the taxpayers.”
With the current mill rate projection of 28.04, Fitzgerald said a resident with an average assessed home value of $400,000, the tax increase comes to about $296.
The Library
Nearly 75 people attended the budget hearing including town staff, elected officials, library employees, library board trustees, and members of Friends of the Scranton Library. A few residents came to speak against the BOE budget, but the overwhelming majority came to speak against the cut to the library budget. Residents spoke for an hour against the cut, highlighting what the cut would do to staffing numbers and the ability to provide services to residents.
The Board of Selectmen originally proposed the $300,000 cut to the library’s operating budget as a response to the library’s move to a temporary facility later this year as a $15 million library renovation begins this year. Over the past 20 years, the town has covered anywhere from 84- to 88 percent of the library operating budget; this year the library asked for $1,248,481 from the town. In justifying the cut, the board noted that part of the reason the library lobbied for expanding the library from 17,000 to 37,000 square feet was the inability to provide desired programming in the 17,000-square-foot space; the temporary space the library will occupy during renovation is 3,600 square feet.
While most of the conversation at the budget hearing was civil, at times emotions started to run high.
“This budget reduction is shortsighted in my opinion,” said resident Robert Fryrear. “I think that during construction expansion, our need for helpful library staff may even increase to handle all of the changes involved. I think the entire $300,000 should be reinstated so we can continue without interruption to serve the needs of the taxpayers.”
Residents spoke about what the reduction might do to the hours at the library and the effect the cut might have on library patrons. Resident Paul Petrie said this cut is the wrong move in the short term and for the long-term health of the library.
“I appreciate the approach to the budget,” he said. “I like that it’s long-term thinking and I think the results are good with one huge blind spot and—surprise—it’s the cut to the library’s operating budget. There is no one-to-one comparison between a operating reduction and floor space and the need for staff.”
Former first selectman Fillmore McPherson applauded the BOF for how it is maintaining the fund balance, but suggested the fund balance could be used to help the library this year.
“It does concern me that the library is going to be losing some good people...A lot of other things can be reinstated, but when people are gone they are gone,” he said. “I would ask you to consider putting back some of the funds and reallocating some of the fund balance that we do have to address this, if not in the budget, then maybe in a special appropriation after the fact.”
Resident Maureen Lopes said the library is made up of people and asked the BOF why it was willing to invest in fire trucks but not in people.
“There are people on the BOF who I am pretty sure have never even been in the library…I feel sorry for you,” she said. “I don’t even care if you put back the $300,000. You will have already damaged the institution and we will remember.”
Resident Joan Walker, a former selectman, said she wants to see the full $300,000 put back and that just because the library is going to a smaller space doesn’t mean it needs fewer people. She also referenced the support voters showed when approving the $9.1 million bond that represents the town’s contribution to the $15 million library renovation.
“By making these draconian cuts, you have ignored the experts and the oversight boards, which I can only think is for someone’s own agenda,” she said. “I have heard it will cover the debt costs for the bond for no particular amount of time. That is not what the voters wanted. The voters voted to incur debt, not reduce services and programs.”
Members of the BOF denied that the cut would be used to cover the debt. Residents in attendance repeatedly asked the BOF to reconsider its position and listen to the people, saying the desire to put the money back was the “will of the majority”.
BOF member Ken Kaminsky said he wasn’t sure if he would consider the crowd in the room the majority compared to the total voter population in town. Kaminsky also said understanding the will of the majority is important and in future would like to see big bond projects like the library placed on the November general election ballot to ensure high voter turnout.
Kaminsky’s comments were drowned out by loud boos from the crowd; following the meeting Friends of the Scranton Library President Joan O’Neil said Kaminsky should step down from the BOF for even questioning the referendum process.
Coyne was one of the last to speak and said the library has always had a clear plan for the transition and that the budget is not padded so any cuts will result in a loss of staff.
“I know that we asked for a new library to be built based on the fact that we need more and improved space so how confusing that we are now saying we can provide services in a smaller space,” she said. “I am sure that any woman who has ever given birth would agree that you can withstand any amount of pain for a short period of time knowing that you will have a beautiful new creation on the other end. The staff of the library have lived in less than adequate space for some time and they have done an amazing job and they are prepared and ready to have even further disruption to their work space during the next phase of our library. I am so hopeful that the people who have worked all these years and hold the institutional history of our library will have a chance to be present at the birth of this new library and to enjoy the opportunities to work in the new building.”
In the midst of the comments, Fitzgerald said she there is one thing she wants to make clear in the whole discussion.
“I know this is not going to bring solace to people who are angry and I understand that but it’s a commitment from the BOF and BOS that when the new library opens we will restore their base and again I realize that is not enough for some people, but I want you to know that this is not a matter of us questioning the value of the library,” she said. “We have gotten emails with people questioning if we value you the library and I have had people say, ‘We know you want this to fail.’ I just need to be very clear from the town’s position: We understand the value of the library. We are supporting the library in the way that we think is fiscally responsible. I understand we are not going to agree on that. I understand people are going to be angry about it but I can promise you have a commitment from two boards to reinstate the base once the library is up and running in the new location.”