CT News Junkie

A Connecticut news site that understands the usual media offerings just…aren’t…enough.

Education Funding Tops Agenda of Small Town Officials

by | Jan 19, 2011 6:23pm () Comments | Commenting has expired | Share
Posted to: Local Politics, State Budget

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy reassured the Connecticut Council of Small Towns Wednesday that he will be mindful of his budget’s impact on municipalities as he attempts to address a laundry list of shortfalls including the expiration of federal stimulus dollars for education.

“Every step of the way I am concentrating on how do I avoid hurting communities? How do I avoid hurting municipal governments and boards of education? And, by the way, that’s not an easy job,” Malloy told the group gathered in Cromwell.

Malloy recalled the decision made last year by former Gov. M. Jodi Rell and the legislature to supplant the state’s share of education funding with federal stimulus funds which expire this year.

Though Malloy has said he would like to maintain funding for education not all local officials present Wednesday believed him.

Andover First Selectman Robert F. Burbank said he found most of Malloy’s speech encouraging, but wasn’t happy with the language he used when talking about the state’s share of education grants.

“When he says everything is on the table, he made a campaign promise to the towns that he would not touch the education,”  Burbank said.

Burbank came close to accusing Malloy of going back on a campaign promise for failing to take a stronger stance on local education grants.

“I think we’re all in a wait and see posture until the governor’s budget is released,” said Windham Town Manager Neal Beets. Malloy’s speech was something of a mixed message, Beets said. A lot of it was reassuring, he said, but some of it was cause for concern. “School funding and education funding, it’s hard to over-emphasize how important they are to us.”

While Malloy seemed to be bracing the group for a budget that will almost certainly include disappointments for many towns, he reminded them that he hasn’t forgotten the challenges of running a local government.

“I do understand what’s going on with local government. I led Stamford as mayor for 14 years and prior to that I was on the board of education for a year and prior to that I was on the board of finance for 11 years. So I’ve got a pretty long, steeped history in local government and understanding a lot of the pressures you’re under,” he said.

Allowing towns to broaden their tax base by allowing them to raise revenue from places other than the property tax is just one of the ways, Malloy proposed helping local officials. But he warned them that increasing revenue through things such as a local hotel tax is no excuse to open the flood gates for future expenditures.

Increasing revenue through different taxes was part of the discussion Wednesday before Malloy arrived. During a panel discussion Rep. Craig Miner, R-Litchfield, expressed some doubt about where the additional revenue generated would end up.

“I don’t necessarily favor any additional revenue options for municipalities,” he said. “I don’t think the money is going to go to municipalities. The clearing house for state revenue will be the state of Connecticut and if you believe the state of Connecticut is going to consistently send you that check, I bring you the ECS formula. It is not going to happen ladies and gentleman.”

Miner said the money would be exchanged from one “pocket” to another. There is not a business in the state that is doing well, he told the group and asked if they really wanted to see another layer of taxes added on to one that already exists.

“Until the state of Connecticut begins to make meaningful reductions in its operation, its cost of doing business, I have no reason to believe that that revenue stream will be anything more than a temporary blip for which you will have given up some portion if not all of your ECS funds,” he said.

Sen. President Donald Williams, D-Brookfield, said he is open to the idea of additional revenue sources, which may include hotel taxes or local sales tax, but said allowing 169 towns to adopt their own taxes may unwittingly discourage economic growth. Because each town has a different situation as far as shopping areas and sales, allowing for municipal sales taxes may exasperate the “problem of haves and have-nots.”

“Cities and municipalities that are already doing okay from a tax base point of view because they have significant retail, because they have the shopping malls, they have the hotels etcetera where people spend their money, that allowing them to add on those additional fees will simply increase the revenue that they’re getting based on their larger tax base,” he said, adding that towns without shopping centers will find that additional tax revenues won’t get them anywhere.

Williams encouraged the local leaders to submit ideas on how the state can help municipalities and save money because there will be pain as cuts are made, he said.

“We need your ideas,” he told them. “The easy cuts are gone. They are all gone.”

Tags: , ,

Share this story with others.

Share | |


(6) Archived Comments

posted by: johnnyb | January 20, 2011  12:17am

Because Williams, Merrill and Donovan didn’t make any tough choices over the last two years but instead blew through the rainy day fund, the Federal stimulus funds, and borrowed we are where we are. They didn’t demand that spending was cut at the town levels as well as at the State level and here we are. Town salaries are just as much to blame for their desperate need for Statemoney. Plainville has their teachers getting a 5% raise by contract this year. Who is getting raises like that anymore. Towns need to reduce salaries to stay solvent. There should be a pay freeze on anyone who is at their top step of contracted union raises. Yes that means cops and firefighters too. This way there won’t have to be layoffs of the most recently hired employees. Constant salary inflation is at the root of government bankruptcy which is where we are right now, at the national, state and town level.

posted by: Specter | January 20, 2011  9:20am

I would agree that education needs funding - it’s an important issue. But, the problem in this state is that none of the politicians want to cut spending - at least not in a substantial way (Remember the emergency session in December 2009 when the CGA came up with like $12M in cuts to offset a $1.8B deficit - absolutely laughable). Yesterday the state of Texas put out their proposed budget (draft form) showing $13.7B in actual spending cuts. Spending cuts means that what you spend next year is actually LOWER than what you spent this year, not a reduction in the amount you planned to increase the budget….

posted by: hawkeye | January 20, 2011  11:30am

Spector: It is hard to envision, that with a Democratic governor, and a big spending, Democratic General Assembly, that we will see a lower state budget, than last year.

Reduced spending, is not in the chemistry of these people, we elected to office. It’s like “we are stuck, between a rock, and a hard place!”

posted by: smiles | January 20, 2011  4:47pm

Education should never be cut always OVER funded. This is the future. Spending can be cut, but they need to do audits. There is a lot of wasted spending, it needs to be identified first. It may be a cost at first, but it will help in the end. No offense seeing state workers out for breakfast and lunch on non storm days is a bit disturbing. I don’t get paid time to do both and I am not talking a 15 min break either. Working in a diner and seeing the same faces for several hours a day at times you see things….Now that I am older paying taxes it bothers me!

posted by: hawkeye | January 24, 2011  11:26am

What can Gov. Danell Malloy really do, with an overdrawn checking account?
It’s all hypothetical!

posted by: ... | January 24, 2011  4:01pm


Let’s see what he has to say on the 16th.

Social Networks We Use

Connecticut Network


Our Partners

Sponsored Messages