Should the selectmen be able to set an overall annual budget or tax level that would function as a ceiling on both town and education expenses?
Would wetlands oversight get more attention if separated from the Planning and Zoning Commission’s duties?
What about a charter change to limit appropriations outside the budget, like the $7-million Schlumberger and $5-million library votes?
Those are some ideas proposed to the Charter Revision Commission, which began its work with a kick-off public hearing last Thursday, and meets again Wednesday, Jan. 22, at 7 p.m. in town hall.
“We’re just trying to hit the ground running at the next meeting, and I’m sure everyone will have a lot of ideas as to how to proceed,” said Paul Jasinski, who was elected chairman by his fellow charter commissioners Thursday.
Eight people spoke at the hearing, mostly citizens, but also a few public officials. The commission also received e-mailed ideas collected from boards and commissions by the first selectman’s office.
The idea which got the most discussion at the hearing was the separation of wetlands regulation from planning and zoning duties. But probably the most dramatic changes proposed related to the town’s fiscal operations.
The Board of Selectman proposed they be given authority to set a budget and tax increase level — a power now held by the Board of Finance, and one which would indirectly give the selectmen a role in setting school spending. They also sought authority over school capital requests.
Along with some other suggestions — such as appointing rather than electing the town treasurer and requiring environmental studies for open space donations — the memo from the selectmen to the Charter Commission says:
“Board of Selectmen establish a maximum budget expenditure figure to be presented to the Board of Finance.
“All Board of Education capital appropriation requests, whether budgetary or additional, should be submitted through the Board of Selectmen for approval.”
It was the “maximum budget expenditure figure” which had gotten the most discussion from the selectmen the night before, when they debated what to suggest.
“We should be able to set a limit,” Selectman Andy Bodner said. “There’s absolutely no control over what the spending in this town can be.”
“Would that be changing the role of the Board of Finance?” Selectwoman Maureen Kozlark asked.
“That gets back to limiting the Board of Education,” she added.
Other board members argued the selectmen would set an overall limit, not dictate specifics of the school budget
First Selectman Rudy Marconi noted that he often has a hard time convincing people the selectmen don’t really control the amount of the budget, or the tax increase — that two thirds of it is education spending, an amount on which the selectman under current charter can only offer a “non-binding recommendation” to the finance board.
“I think where Andy’s concern is: How do we better control the mill rate increase to the people, as a Board of Selectmen, the policy-making board of town?” he said.
Mr. Marconi and Mr. Bodner said many different municipalities — from Danbury and Trumbull to New York City — give town officials a larger role in school budgets.
Ms. Kozlark wasn’t convinced, but she was alone.
“I think the checks and balances that are currently in place have probably served the town well,” she said.
The school board, discussing charter issues on Monday, suggested going the other direction: Get rid of the selectmen’s non-binding recommendation on the school budget?
“Every time we go to the Board of Selectman there’s a line-by-line breakdown of the numbers we’re submitting,” School Board Chairman Austin Drukker said later. “But if they’re going to be doing a review of our budget, they should be at every meeting and hear the issues being discussed.”
Another fiscal control idea came from Gene Waradzin of Marcardon Avenue. He suggested eliminating or at least limiting opportunities for the voters to approve non-emergency appropriations outside of the budget process. He used the $5-million library and the $7-million Schlumberger votes as examples.
Money requests shouldn’t be put before voters in isolation from the annual budget process in May, Mr. Waradzin said, because voters have no financial context.
“You don’t know what you’re going to be asked to cough up in May, when all the big money comes,” he said.
Mr. Waradzin also suggested doing away with voice votes as means of deciding issues at town meetings.
Separating wetlands from planning and zoning was discussed by five speakers — four in favor, one opposed.
“The work of Planning and Zoning Commission and Inland Wetlands Board is probably enough work for three commissions,” said Dave Goldenberg of the Affordable Housing Committee.
“Our Planning and Zoning Commission is so busy with the everyday work of zoning they don’t have time to devote to the important business of planning,” he said.
Ellen Burns of the Ridgefield Open Space Association, Dave Cronin of the Conservation Commission, and Helen Dimos of the Architectural Advisory Committee also spoke in favor of separating the wetlands work from planning and zoning functions.
“I really feel it’s too much for one commission,” Ms. Dimos said. “They can’t effectively do all the zoning, any planning, and inland wetlands as well.”
Patrick Walsh, vice chairman of the Planning and Zoning Commission and Inland Wetlands Board, presented the other side of the issue.
He noted that the last two Charter Revision Commissions had looked into the idea, but hadn’t recommended it.
He offered to answer any questions and passed on a memorandum from Town Planner Betty Brosius.
“In the past, there have been attempts to split the Commission/Board into two or three separate entities (Planning, Zoning and Wetlands). I strongly disagree with this suggestion,” Ms. Brosius wrote.
She recalled that Ridgefield’s commission had opposed a 2007 state proposal on separating wetlands from planning and zoning roles.
“There may be a ‘substantial fiscal impact’ for communities that decide to separate these agencies because of the need to hire additional staff, create additional files (which need space and supporting budgets), and find room and time for scheduling additional meetings,” Ms. Brosius said.
Mr. Walsh added that he felt the agency functions better than critics suggest.
“It works quite efficiently, quite effectively,” Mr. Walsh said.