Connecticut Lawmakers; 104

Oh. The following is a sci fi TV original. I'm Paul Douglas welcome to this week's edition of Connecticut lawmakers at the state capitol of these days the focus continues to be on the governor's budget. As members of the budget writing committee continue their hearings and they hear from agency heads and the public now upset over reductions and funds and cuts to various state programs. On this week's program local leaders representing cities and towns warn about cuts in aid and they vent their frustration at Governor Weicker over there having to raise property taxes. We also take a close up look at one time around that will be affected by

getting less money from the state. The proposed state budget before the General Assembly is nothing more than snake oil sold to the General Assembly and the people of Connecticut. It's a budget that calls for no tax increases. It represents tax transfer with a vengeance. What city and town leaders were reacting to was governor Weicker has proposed 143 million dollars in cuts to municipal aid. Now we get to the matter of the towns this budget cuts aid to the town's one hundred seventy six million including education. Annual aid to the municipalities has risen from six hundred seventy seven million in nineteen eighty two to one point six billion and nineteen ninety one the state can no longer afford to subsidize cities and towns at such high rates that ease the blow I am proposing significant reductions in state

mandates including Will as including changes to binding arbitration for municipal employees binding arbitration for teachers and hearten hypertension benefits which the municipalities have told us are their major blockbusters. S. I am also encouraging towns to look at regionalization for savings inefficiencies of operations. Well we in Connecticut have a proud tradition of home rule and when this administration stands firmly behind regionalization of some services such as transportation education makes the school sense and should be given serious thought by the managers and taxpayers 116 I mean it's a problem it's the huge cutbacks in state aid included in the proposed state budget

would force communities to impose steep property tax hikes along with draconian cuts in local services. Many communities would lose more than 50 percent of their state aid. 21 towns would lose two thirds of their state aid and the proposed level of aid is at least two hundred sixty million dollars less than municipalities are scheduled to receive in the next budget year that's under existing law. We are told that the proposed budget seeks to help the children that will not wash with the children and the parents in the towns that would receive 53 million dollars less in local education aid for their municipalities. It will not wash with the children and the parents in the towns who received 53 million dollars less in general assistance than we are now receiving enormous apologies. We are told that the proposed budget seeks to create jobs that will

not wash either. The public school teachers and the municipal employees that will face layoffs because of these drastic cuts in state aid will need to be enacted. We're told the budget is pro-business that will not wash with the majority of the businesses in our state or small to medium sized. If these state cuts are enacted businesses will undoubtedly pay higher property taxes and property tax is already the single largest tax out of business in Connecticut. In fact the governor's proposed state budget will make the largest state local tax in Connecticut. The property tax they came to the state capitol to lobby lawmakers in to state their case and express their anger over having to consider raising property taxes if the cuts are not restored. The governor's proposed budget as proposed would result in a tax transfer to the property tax payers. These are the homeowners. These are the landlords. These are

the businesses of Connecticut. This is an outright tax transfer so the governor is what he's doing or what the budget has done is appropriate to post a tax increase in property taxes. It's a tax increase compared to only this year's funding. It's a cut and it's a tax bill for one hundred forty four million dollars. The governor has suggested here that over 1 billion dollars has been cut from the current servicing from the state budget on the same current service basis. Local governments USA Palla the cities and towns have been cut three hundred and twenty one million dollars. Quite a substantial cut. The bottom line is is to the individual the average homeowner in each municipality will have a tax increase in excess of 200 dollars. That is before municipal needs are taken to account. That is before a legally binding labor contracts are honored that is before increases in insurance costs or better for town and school employees

have been taken in to account. It also does not take into account the effect of the recession on local tax bases. We welcome the debate on reform of the welfare system in particular General Assistance. But what is very onerous about it before the General Assembly is in keeping with this policy of shifting responsibility from the state to the city. What we see here is a massive shift of financial responsibility for general assistance in decreasing the reimbursement rate to the cities from a from 8 to 10 percent to 33 percent level. This will have a very significant financial impact on 10 years the pallies in particular and on all of them to some extent. We're talking about in the case of the city of New Britain an additional 1.3 million dollars in local revenue which will have to be put into a welfare budget

to make up for this. The funding by the state that equates to a mill in the city of New Britain. I'm very certain that in towns like New Haven Waterbury and Bridgeport those numbers are far greater. We know that welfare have to be reformed as I said earlier we welcome that debate. Who are we. We have grand lists as you've heard that show almost no growth in West Hartford. Eighty five percent of our taxes come from residential property tax payers. We have a very diverse population. We have some affluent people or we used to have some but we also have other people in wester and in some of the other inner ring suburbs. We have many retirees who live on fixed incomes. Twenty two percent of our residents are over the age of 65. Ten percent of the kids in

our school are eligible for free or reduced price lunches and 14 percent of the children in our schools do not speak English as their primary language. 15 percent of the households in West Hartford over 3500 households are at 2 percent of the federal poverty level. We are projecting almost a one million dollar general assistance budget in West Hartford and many of our residents like others have been devastated by this recession. But what is happening to us. Last year eight point one million dollars to West Hartford in aid to education next year under the governor's budget one point eight million. When I saw those figures I thought it had to be a typo the

reversal of those two digits a 78 percent loss of state aid to education over a two year period is what the governor's proposal is doing. Total State Aid decreases seven million six hundred and seventy thousand dollars or 59 percent over that period. That's the revenue side. Now let's look about the expenditure side in West Hartford and West Hartford is not alone. Manchester other communities they've all done the same. We have tightened our belt. And we will continue to show restraint in spending as an artist that's going to be that restraint is going to mean layoffs. It has already meant layoffs and it's going to mean changes in service. It has already been changes in service. The last part of this wonderful trilogy taxes what's

happened to taxes in this same period no spending increase no spending increase last year decrease this year and we're projecting no spending increase next year. West Hartford has the fifth highest effective tax rate in the state of Connecticut. Last year taxes rose by an average of 14 percent. Local property taxes. This year they rose by just under 10 percent. And if this budget goes through we are looking at a seven point one percent tax increase 4 percent for the cuts and 3 percent for the builtin revaluation that we're facing. That's 31 percent almost in a three year period to local taxpayers in West Hartford

with no spending increase. In fact a spending decrease although we recognize that we are all in this financial and economic dilemma together. We do not however believe that the fiscal problems of the state should be solved by plunging cities and towns in a financial crisis. After all the cities and towns did not create the state's budget problems. Therefore state aid to municipalities especially state aid for educational purposes must stand. You cannot continue to be eroded. We don't feel that that devastating us at this point is the right thing to do for the communities and we intend to be seen and heard on a regular basis at the legislative body at home at local meetings. We intend to let our public know what is happening here in Hartford and their state officials their representatives and senators must support the municipal leaders. In the past sometimes that has not happened. This year we can't take no for an answer. We need that support if in fact the legislature is going to

adopt the governor's proposal which says no new taxes or no increase in taxes. Then you better be a little more honest because the governor's budget will cause an increase in taxes increases in the least fair tax of all the property the local property tax used Hartford's budget 92 percent constitutes personnel costs. We are currently in contract negotiations we have negotiated Fortunately I think three of the best contracts in the state of Connecticut. But we should be negotiating in the negative. We should be looking for drastic reductions in salaries etc.. We can't do that as long as we have binding arbitration with a gun to our head because we know as soon as we go to an arbitration panel they will not rule on behalf of management. It is a labor board and historically they have ruled on behalf of labor. The local leaders may get some attention at the state capitol but few lawmakers are predicting a restoration of aid. Instead there may be a reshuffling

of funds and a push to eliminate state mandate on the local town next. Rocky Hill is one of those towns that will be forced to raise property taxes depending on what the legislature does with the governor's proposed budget line Landis spent some time in Rocky Hill this week. Here's his report. Public schools in Rocky Hill would bear the brunt of proposed state spending cuts amounting to one and a half million dollars. That's a lot for a suburban town that devotes over half of its current 30 million dollar budget to education. Rocky Hill once a town of unpaved roads is now a mix of 16000 residents blue and white collar workers many of whom commute to Hartford. But loss of school aid the result of a shift of state money to equalize the education in the more economically depressed cities and rural areas. In very simple terms it means one of two things. It either means a pass along in and in the way of an added tax to the to the taxpayer of rocky

hill or it means a serious substantial reduction in local service and that reduction in local service can come in several places. It can come from the loss of teachers in our school system. To the closing of the library to the loss of police officers to perhaps reduced hours in town hall and reduce staff levels that will create longer lines when you're paying your tax bill perhaps it can encompass a whole array of things mere Unwin admits the choice of cutting services will be painful but he says the taxpayers of Rocky Hill are between a rock and a hard place. Rocky Hill already has a high property tax rate placing 30th among the 169 towns and cities largely because of the need to build up its school system. The mayor says when it comes to next year's budget beginning July

1st there's no way he would ask taxpayers and businesses to cough up an additional 15 to 20 percent in taxes to cover the state's spending cuts. They hit that we take in very simple terms with the governor's proposed budget comes out to almost one and a half million dollars. We have about a little under a 30 million dollar town budget. That's a substantial loss in revenue. It's it's added on to the loss in revenue that we're experiencing from a slower in the lower tax collection rate. In other words the economy is slowed down. So people. Where we normally would collect 98 percent of our taxes somewhere. That the city will be collecting about 95 percent of our taxes so we lose almost a million dollars just in there alone. We have we have in our town a substantial number of commercial real estate that's empty.

We have office buildings that are among the least vacant. The people that own those buildings are struggling like like everybody else they're trying to make their payments. Some are slow. Some aren't able to make their payments there have been a few foreclosures in that in our town. Even though the proposed state aid cuts would have a dramatic impact on a town such as Rocky Hill the larger national recession holds a great deal more uncertainty for everyone in town. Example if one of the largest corporate tax payers were to close its corporate headquarters the impact on rocky hill would be substantial in terms of lost tax revenue. The prospect of reduced state aid is compounded by the fact that Rocky Hill has lots of tax exempt state property within its borders. Those are properties that. Will never be built privately and and taxed by the town of Rocky Hill. And if you added up the value of all of those buildings in the

properties that the state have in our in our little town of rocky hill here they would be the number one tax payer in our town. And they would if they paid taxes like Ames or some of our other major taxpayers they would pay the town of rocky hill in excess of three quarters of a million dollars. We are getting under the governor's proposed budget we're going to get a 23 percent chop in the pilot grant that we get now. OK. So they're going to reduce that by 23 percent. We get a probably somewhere in the vicinity of a third. We get somewhere in the vicinity of a third of what we would get. But that's going to be chopped by 23 percent. The mayor says the current economic recession makes it counterproductive for the town to increase local taxes to cover the state's spending cuts. And it's not just the working people that and I'm talking about

you know a tax increase is passed on to businesses as well and these businesses can probably afford it even less than the working folks because as I had indicated earlier we have a lot of real estate that's empty. We have. Some people that are that are walking on thin ice they're just gone month to month trying to survive even if the town comes along and in the hands of a 15 or 20 percent tax increase that could put them right under who's who. Who does that serve. Is that is that in the town's best interests that certainly isn't the Republican mayor in this largely Democratic town doesn't see any restoration of the state aid cuts during the current legislative session. I don't think that there's going to be any consensus building up there I think that you're going to see the legislators are going to be in a hurry to get out of election year election year they're going to try and get into some other issues. I think they're going to leave the governor's budget pretty much alone the way it is right now.

I think we're stuck with it. Plain-English and Mayor Unwin is critical of the governor and the legislature for paying what he calls lip service on the hot issues of mandated services and binding arbitration that drives many towns and cities in Connecticut. But financial wall it comes back to cutting services to absorb the the loss in revenue or it comes down to handing the people of 15 or 20 percent of tax increase to pay for it. And I think cutting services is the way it's it's going to go down. Rocky in Rocky Hill. Not happy about it not happy. Not a not a good time to be a public official. For Connecticut lawmakers. I'm on Lantus for the past several months a commission named by the governor has been working to restructure state government and to come up with some ways to save money. That panel is headed by Keith Clark

Hall former state supreme court judge a lieutenant governor and state senator. His co-chair is State Senator Joseph Harper the New Britain Democrat who is Senate chair of the Appropriations Committee. File recommendations are at hand and commission members are cautiously optimistic about making a difference. Well I think the major recommendations are going to be structural that is combining agencies and rationalizing our information processing and service delivery and the attendant organization issues that the legislature is going to have to debate. I think the spirit of the of the commission is to provide services to the public better not eliminate services but provide services in a better way and on a more coordinated basis that the commission to effect government reorganisation

voted to support a plan to overhaul the state's social welfare services. This was taken as another example that the commission created to implement change was serious about its basic purpose. It is my opinion that if properly implemented in the long run. Millions and millions of dollars are going to be saved and our citizens are going to be better served. Now you asked the next important question where do we go from here. Well you probably heard my remarks before the commission. This complex mind of our all of our task forces but particularly the human resources as far as has required the great co-operation of the governor's office of secretary Bill Seabass Office of Policy and Management. Mike now our doctor now our legislative program review and of all our professional and support staffs of all the leading legislators of both parties and it worked. It worked. We were able to get everybody

together to come up with a program that I believe is going to be a blueprint for many years to come now that the specific question is What do they do with the legislature Well that's beyond me but that's in the capable hands of people like Senator Kenny prigs week and a senator Joe Walker my co chairman the commission. But beyond that I'm right now formulating in my mind a smaller group called perhaps the committee to implement. We were the Committee to effect or bring about reorganization state government. The Committee to implement reorganization state government and that's the next step down the road clearly. When you talk about change you're going up against some forces out there that would rather not see change in some fundamental ways whether it's in human services Higher Education Information Services. I hope people take the time to look at some of these recommendations and help us build the momentum to see that change happen because not only will these provide for cost savings for taxpayers but fundamentally better service for those same tax dollars I mean

that's critically important. I think there's been great cooperation between the Executive and Legislative branches in this respect. And I think the blueprint that is been created does provide for real change I think real change has to be. Construed However as meaning more efficient better delivery of services more coherent more consistent. I'm not certain that there will be a huge savings of dollars but I think that there will be a better delivery of services as a consequence. You have been here for a long time you've seen studies come and go. Some aspects of various studies implemented. Is there something do you think this time around I think you know some of the changes and proposals suggested his commission a better chance. I think so. Unlike the Thomas commission and which recommendations were primarily those of consultants who are not part of the legislative process. The people on the harbor hole commission invested themselves. Both the executive and the legislative

in the process and in the recommendations. So I think there's greater likelihood of ultimate adoption of those suggestions. A bit of history and nostalgia on the agenda for state senators this week. Ever since 1988 the state Senate has held a session in the old state house in downtown Hartford to remind them of their place in history. The underlying purpose of course is to reaffirm our historical connection to this building and to point out the ancient tradition of democracy in this state which goes back certainly to this building until well before this building when the state of Connecticut was a colonial state a charter state which was about as free a state as you could get in the days before America and the United States was formed. You think some of the past colleagues who served right here in this room had some budgetary problems that equal those that you and the

administration and today's colleagues are confronting. I imagine they did I imagine they had problems of one sort or another which were equally monumental certainly. The decision to break with the mother country must have been one of the enormously difficult decisions in 1812 the dissension over the war with England and France and the involved in the Napoleonic Wars it was very very divisive in fact it's really spawn some secessionist sentiment and then of course the crises that two major crises that led to the Civil War. The compromise of 1830 in the Compromise of 1850 were very very difficult times. So I think they had they had their problems to actually get a business here today a resolution that concerns and effects southeastern Connecticut.

Right. We are going to do our normal business. If this were a regular session day we would be meeting at the present Capitol on Capitol Hill. The only difference is that we have moved our operation into this old state house and as I say it's a symbolic gesture to occasionally reaffirm the link and the long tradition of elective representative democracy in the state of Connecticut. Members of the state Senate took time out of their bi annual visit to the old statehouse landmark to one or two of their colleagues. State Senator George doc Gunther Republican of Stratford who has served in the state Senate for 25 years and is the senior senator. And state senator a media must own she is a Democrat of merit in who has served for 14 years the longest of any woman in the state Senate. Finally state union employee leaders have accused the governor of bad faith because he has proposed changing collective bargaining. This is

going to be a major fight in the current session and we'll have more on that battle in future programs. That's this week's edition of Connecticut lawmakers. I'm Bob Douglas. And we do thank you for joining us.