CALL TO ORDER

The Chairman, Mr. Kimmel, called the meeting to order at 8:55 p.m.

2002 OPERATING BUDGET

Mr. Kimmel stated that the only item on the agenda was to give some discussion to the Operating Budget. He informed the assembly that next Tuesday the City Charter required the Council to take some action and he felt it warranted some discussion at Committee level. The two issues he was interested in were: 1.-An update from the Finance Department on the departmental requests received and 2.-The possibility of the Committee making a cap recommendation to send to the Council.

Mr. Miller stated that his Department had not finished tabulating all of the resubmissions from the various departments and he noted that they were waiting for 2 departments to respond. He went on to state that he could not give a total at this time since he was still tabulating and waiting for those 2 submissions. He remarked that he was getting the general impression that the departments were not backing down to pro forma level. Mr. Kimmel interjected that this was not an easy task and everyone was trying their best. He asked Mr. Miller if he had any ideas, not so much for actual cuts, but on how to combine 2 departments that might overlap. Mr. Miller replied that he had not seen any resubmissions that presented those types of notions. He added that the responses had just been related to each department’s work, personnel and the wage increases they had to cover in their budget.

Mr. Miklave stated that he felt that residents had expressed at the Ordinance Committee Meeting and at the previously held Public Hearing that they were concerned about the budget and its future. He stressed that the Members were sensitive to those concerns and noted that many things were in play. He mentioned that they were eagerly awaiting the results of the study done by PricewaterhouseCoopers. He remarked that the Mayor had voiced his concern about the status of the budget to the various departments and had requested that the budgets be reviewed and revised. Mr. Miklave said that the Members understood that this had been city government that had been squeezed for years in order to prevent tax increases from taking place. He added that many agencies and departments had operated under those conditions. He also remarked that he felt there had been recognition by the voters that the former Council had not done enough to meet the needs of the taxpayers. He mentioned that the tax rebate last year just prior to the election concerned many. He added that some of the people had felt that the money should have been spent in different ways for the needs of the City.

Mr. Miklave stated that he felt the Members could not look at the budget and say that they had a real idea of where they were going right now. He recommended that the Committee set the cap at a 0% increase to give the Members some time in the next 2 months to take the opportunity to review the budget very closely.

Ms. Bain stated that the Members were not ready at this point to put a real figure on the cap percentage or grant the 15% increase that the current numbers indicated. She asked for guidance in determining the impact the cap had on the Board of Estimates and Taxation and their deliberations, particularly 15% versus 0%. She went on to state that she was fully in favor of putting out a truly erroneous number and noted that in past years if the Members set the cap the Board of Estimate and Taxation had to accept it.

Mr. Mann stated that he felt if the Committee set a zero cap it would have no impact on the Board of Estimates and Taxation because clearly it would say it was not real. However, he feared that it would upset citizens. He pointed out that last year when it was done it created a panic. He went on to state that he did not support setting a zero cap and he added that he did not support setting a fake anything. Mr. Mann remarked that once they stated that a cap had been set a certain number of people would actually believe it to be true. He said that he would rather use the departmental requests and work down from that. He commented that he did not want to set a zero increase even though he agreed that they could not reasonably know at this point what it would be. He stressed that he did not like it when it was done 2 years ago because it had caused unnecessary panic. Mr. Mann closed by stating that the expectation level certain people had came from what they read and believed. He added that if they ultimately went up it would not sit well with him and he would not vote for it.

Mr. Kimmel stated that when the Republican majority proposed a freeze 2 years ago the Democrats opposed it. He noted that it had been presented as a real freeze. He said that it was presented with that sense of realism to apply pressure on the departments to come up with real savings. He agreed with Mr. Mann’s statement that it had caused panic. He stressed that they were making no pretense to realism in this case. He commented that this was a new Administration and the Charter allowed the process to be concluded in March. He stressed that they all had the same goal – to find savings in the way government operated in Norwalk. He pointed out that this was only the 7^th or 8^th year that the Council had been involved in the process and since the Charter did provide for some flexibility perhaps the Members should change the way it was done.

Mr. Kimmel advised the assembly that he had received a few comments from friends via e-mail recognizing that the City was in a real bind with the budget and it needed to be cut. He informed the assembly that his response was that they needed to slow down as there might be some way out of this without cutting every department to the bone. But, he added, they needed time to make this review.

Ms. Bain stated that she was never in favor of the Charter revision in the cap because it seemed a way for the Council to look good without taking any responsibility for the decisions. She explained that this was due to the fact that it was cap on expenditures that did not deal with revenues. She added that decisions were made without being based on detailed information or thorough review of budgets but were based more on what could not be allowed or what could be afforded. Ms. Bain stated that at some point she would like to revisit the issue. She went on to state that it set up the very unpleasant situation they were now in to set a number. She remarked that they would not know what the impact would be on taxes because they did not have the detailed information on what the revenues would be. She commented that she had a problem with the cap and that she would rather not put out a number that had some sense of realism to it and have people think that it was the direction they were going. She closed by stating that the number would be so far fetched because they were forced by Charter to do this when what they really needed was more time.

Mr. Krummel stated that he had heard 2 strong concerns: one was for provision of services because services were not being provided in accordance with taxes paid and the other was for seniors not being able to afford taxes. He went on to state that he knew some departments were performing very well under handicapped conditions but he felt other departments might need a little urging to perform better. He commented that he had not reviewed the budget to see if there were any efforts made by the departments to prioritize or if these were simply requests. He questioned if there was a balance to preserve a need for additional personnel with other departments that might be able to wait.

Mr. Miller stated that the departments were asked to prioritize their budget requests, especially for equipment. He advised that they weighed these requests against other requests within the department and with other departments. However, he informed that they did not try to rank one department over another.

Mr. Perrone left the Chambers at 9:20 p.m.

Mr. Miller stated that they reviewed the amount of each department’s activity to determine if it had decreased or increased and if some other activity could pick it up. He advised that they also reviewed different options, a list of options that were policy divisions.

Mr. Krummel commented that he was looking for guidance because obviously every department was not going to get everything that they wanted and every need could not be equal. He remarked that there had to be an evaluation of department requests and a weighing of one versus another.

Mr. Miller stated that he would like to take the approach of meeting with all the departments, review their budgets and if he had a disagreement with any of the requests he would send his recommendation to the Board of Estimates and Taxation. He felt that in that type of forum there could be a debate between him and the department. He also felt that they might be able to better balance staff resources between the Parks and Recreation Department and the Department of Public Works. He noted that there was a myriad of different options and they still had not received a lot of information. He mentioned that they still did not have the entire budget from the Board of Education, adding that he was waiting for a response from Dr. Corda.

Mr. Miklave stated that he believed that if the Committee voted tonight to recommend that the Council set a 0% cap it would not be a real number. He went on to state that when he looked at the budget he could not see how it could be reasonable. He added that the Members knew that they had to contribute to the Pension Fund. He also mentioned that revaluation was coming up and the process needed to be revamped. He said that City departments had been cut for years and now decisions had to be made to prioritize. Mr. Miklave reasoned that in light of what the City needed to do any number would be a fictitious number. He commented that what they needed to do was to study the budget. He said that he felt that setting a zero cap on Tuesday because they were obligated to set it would be done knowing it was unrealistic. He remarked that no one should get up their hopes because that was not what it would be at the end of the day.

Mr. Kimmel stated that this was his 5^th time around with the Operating Budget but this was the first time the Finance/Claims Committee had discussed the issue openly. He remarked that in the past it had always been discussed in caucus. He commented that he was glad the discussion was being held tonight in front of the public and the press. Mr. Kimmel said that they were talking about recommending a cap to the Council and they needed an artificial number. He went on to say that the 2 numbers in his mind were zero and the request and neither was real. He closed by stating that he agreed with Mr. Miklave and he felt they should keep it simple and it was clear that this was not a real number, it was clear that they had to set a cap and it was clear that they had to find savings.

Mr. Mann stated that he would oppose the motion due to the fact that if neither number were real then he felt setting the cap at zero would do the most damage. He went on to state that when something was printed a certain amount of people would believe it to be true. He suggested that they make the cap high and whittle it down because it would be more real to use the department requests and then work from that.

Mr. Kimmel stated that no matter what the Members did the average tax increase would be 3.7% citywide based on revaluation for single-family homeowners. He added that he was making this statement with the understanding that for some homeowners it would be much higher. He mentioned that the budget requests had been made prior to the new Administration taking office. Mr. Kimmel remarked that they had to say that they didn’t feel they could live with that and they also had to deal with the $3.5 million dollar rebate that was issued. He noted that if they had the ability to move that money over they would not be in the bind they were in now. He added that the rebate had a terrible impact.

Mr. Kimmel advised that whether they started at zero and went up or at the other and went down he was confident that it would be changed. He reiterated that he agreed with Mr. Miklave on the 0%.

Mr. Miklave stated that he would support the motion and he added that he felt it was pointed out correctly that some people would misunderstand what had been said. He went on to state that he was equally concerned that other people might misunderstand that they were voting for a 15% increase. He noted that this would send a message to all that the Members wanted to make an increase. He also noted that he felt the message would be clearly sent that zero was a placeholder. He closed by stating that he did not think either was good and he agreed with Ms. Bain’s suggestion to review the Ordinance.

ADJOURNMENT

** MR. MIKLAVE MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.

** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE.

The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Ann Marie DeLuca

Telesco Secretarial Services

Back to Previous Page	Back to Home Page