From: Susan Kniep, President
The Federation of Connecticut Taxpayer Organizations, Inc.
Website: http://ctact.org/
email: fctopresident@ctact.org
860-524-6501
May 16, 2005
Review
Previous Tax Talk Issues on our Website at http://ctact.org/
WELCOME TO THE 50th EDITION OF
TAX TALK
NEWS HIGHLIGHT!
HOUSE BILL 6447: Although myself and
others attended meetings at the Capitol and encouraged our State Reps to
approve a change to Binding Arbitration (Bill 6447) which would have
safeguarded 100% of the undesignated fund balances of municipalities from being
factored into union negotiations during arbitration, (ultimately watered down
to safeguarding 6% of municipal budgets), the Labor Committee did what it does
best, protected the unions and turned it back on the taxpayers. This Bill, even in its watered down version,
was rejected as Mike informed us on May 3 (see below). Susan
Mike Guarco, BudgetGuru06035@aol.com
Finance Board Chairman, Granby
Subject: HOUSE BILL
6447 DIES IN LABOR COMMITTEE
Date:
May 3, 2005
AN ACT CONCERNING FACTORS CONSIDERED BY AN ARBITRATION
PANEL IN MUNICIPAL BINDING ARBITRATION -To require arbitration panels to
disregard the undesignated general fund balance of a municipal employer in
making binding arbitration awards.
*************
Donna McCalla, ctjodi@sbcglobal.net
Subject: CT Tax Increase Comparison Worksheet Update
May 16, 2005
Hi, all. There have
been some significant changes/updates to the CT Tax Increase Comparisons
Worksheet. There are now 30 defeated
budgets, 62 passed budgets, and one budget (Ashford) that actually resulted in
a tie vote, and will go back for a revote.
Statistically, this 2-1 margin, at this point in the budget season, is
historical. There are 44 towns for which
I have no information as yet, but quite a few of these 44 towns involve Round
Two or Round Four (in the case of Monroe) new budget numbers. The only Round Three vote taking place this
week is in Plainville, but Town Council is coming in with a 3.5% increase
and by charter, there will be no Round Four in Plainville. Of the 30 defeated budgets, the average
proposed (and defeated) tax increase was 6.25%. Of the 62 passed budgets, the average
approved tax increase is currently 4.44%. Interestingly, of the 62 passed budgets, 23
were passed by funding authorities in which residents do not directly vote
(i.e., a Board of Aldermen, a Board of Apportionment and Taxation, an RTM, a
Town Council, etc.) In addition, 17 of
the passed budgets have been at Town Meeting, in which history has already
proven that budgets pass almost automatically (Seymour being the
exception.) Of the 17 regional school
districts, 9 have passed, and 8 have been defeated, which is also historically
significant. The average budget increase
for the 9 districts that have passed budgets is 4.94%. The average budget increase for the 8
districts that have failed is 7.11%.
This average defeated budget number is significantly skewed by Region
8’s defeated 12.3% budget increase. If
Region 8 were left out of the equation, the average defeated regional budget is
6.37%, which is right on the money with the average defeated municipal
budget number of 6.25%.
A request was received to eliminate the blank columns, in
order to make it easier to run tables on the data. Done!
I have always used the blank columns more as a visual separation of the
data, but this request made a lot of sense.
I have tried to keep the FY 2005-06 Education Budget increases tab up to
date as best I can. The “Notes” column
may be useful to you. The other issue
that has come to the forefront in the past couple of weeks is that of
bifurcated budgets. The March 22, 2004 decision by the CT Supreme Court in Board of Education v. Borough of Naugatuck legally allows for bifurcated
budgets in those towns with charter provisions for bifurcated votes. I am already seeing charter proposals in two
western Connecticut towns to move
forward with bifurcation. It is
certainly a “cleaner” process, and gives a great deal of information to funding
authorities on how to proceed in the case of a defeated budget. This is especially true in participating
towns with regional schools. Finally,
some of you have contacted me regarding "tax increases" versus
"spending increases." This is absolutely correct; I am
reporting the proposed tax increase, and not the spending increase. There
is a big difference, as we all know. Some towns have enough reserve built
up to "draw down" the spending increase on a temporary basis; others
do not. I agree that I should be reporting municipal spending increases,
and I will try to do that next year. This year, I have reported
Boards of Educations spending increases, and next year hope to add an
additional tab for municipal spending increases. It does, however, get
complicated because of debt service (and the way various towns handle debt
service) and CIP budgets (and the way towns handle capital budgets.) There are a number of budget votes this week
and next week. I will do my best to get
this week’s results out to you this weekend.
History tells us that those towns that are going to pass their budgets
will do so by June 15, because of the tax bill mailing issue. Those that have not passed by June 15 are
probably in for the long haul. Thanks, Donna
*************
From: Theresa McGrath, Executive Director
Family Alliance for Children in
Education
face0203@comcast.net
School Choice can happen, even
with a Democrat Majority Legislature
ARIZONA ANNOUNCEMENT from Clint Bolick
and Matt Ladner
With the signing of
these bills, Arizona will become the first state
to have both a corporate tax credit and an individual tax credit
program.
Friends, We are pleased to report that a budget
agreement announced today
between Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano and Senate President Ken Bennett and
Speaker Jim Weirs includes a $5 million scholarship tax credit for corporations.
The bill allows for maximum scholarships of $4,200 for grades K-8 and $5,500
for 9-12. Only public school students transferring to private schools are
eligible for aid, and 70% of funds must be spent for children with family
incomes below 185% of the income limit to qualify for reduced lunches.
The credit will begin in 2006. In
addition, a bill eliminating marriage penalties in tax credits will raise the maximum amount
which can be donated to a scholarship
organization under the individual tax credit program passed in 1997.
Originally, the law allowed for a $500 donation. In 2000, the maximum
allowable credit for a couple was raised to $625 as part of a
referendum. The new legislation will phase in an increase to the maximum
credit allowed for a couple to $1,000. The governor has announced that
she will sign the school choice provisions as a part of the overall budget
agreement. This bill represents a major
advancement for school choice in Arizona, which greatly
enhances the current credit while focusing funds on low-income children.
The success of the effort comes as the result of a strong collaborative effort
among the Alliance for School Choice and (in no particular order) the Goldwater
Institute, the Milton and Rose Friedman Foundation, the Hispanic Council for
Reform and
Educational Options, the Arizona Catholic Conference, the Center for
Arizona Policy and the Arizona Free Enterprise Club all played crucial
roles in the passage of this legislation. Signed: Clint Bolick, Alliance for School
Choice, President and General Counsel; Dr. Matthew Ladner,
Alliance for School
Choice, Director of State Projects
*************
Also read: Utah governor snubs 'No
Child' requirements; SALT LAKE CITY,
Utah (AP) -- Gov. Jon Huntsman signed a measure Monday defying the Bush
administration's No Child Left Behind Act despite a warning from the federal
education secretary that it could cost $76 million in federal aid. Continued at this website: http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/05/03/no.child.left.behind.ap/
*************
Jim Mathias, Seecjm@aol.com
East Hampton
Subject: East Hampton Budget
May 16, 2005
East Hampton's budget referendum
was defeated by 2 to 1 margin last month. Using our top/down approach
Common Sense opposed the budget believing it to be $400,000
too high. Following the defeat the BOF
and TC reduced it by $398,000. We are endorsing the budget for the May
18th referendum. The main problem in East Hampton is uncontrolled
residential growth resulting in part from
failure by officials to update the Plan of Conservation and Development
and no open space purchase plan. Additionally, our out of district special education costs are 26% above our ERG average
spending $1.5 million in out of district tuition. Jim
*************
From: webmaster@hebrondollarsandsense.com
Vote on Hebron Town Budget
and CIP budget this Tuesday
Reply to: owner-hebronupdates@blarneys.securesites.net
May 15, 2005
Dollars and Sense has received numerous calls and emails
this weekend (and especially today) regarding a number of issues on next
Tuesday’s vote. We’ll try to answer those questions, but it’s a
complicated situation. Continued at the following website: http://www.hebrondollarsandsense.com/index.php?subaction=showfull&id=1116272655&archive=&start_from=&ucat=8&
*************
Robert Young, ryoung0@snet.net
Wethersfield Taxpayers
Association
Subject: May 24
Special Referendum
May 15, 2005
Concerned Citizens: On May 24th 2005, there will be a special
referendum on two separate citizen sponsored petitions as follows:
Petition 1.
SECTION 101-1.1. THE TOWN OF WETHERSFIELD SHALL NOT
INSTALL, CONSTRUCT OR CAUSE TO BE INSTALLED OR CONSTRUCTED, ANY PERMANENT OR
TEMPORARY FLOODLIGHT, SPOTLIGHT OR OTHER REFLECTOR-TYPE LIGHTING FOR
ILLUMINATION OF SPORTING EVENTS OR OTHER ACTIVITIES ON ANY MUNICIPALLY OWNED
PROPERTY’
This proposal is being submitted to the voters pursuant
to the settlement of a lawsuit brought by the Wethersfield Taxpayers
Association against the Town of Wethersfield. A YES vote will prohibit the installation or
construction of any permanent or temporary floodlight, spotlight or other
reflector-type lighting for illumination of sporting events or other activities
on any municipally owned property. This
ordinance will not have an impact on any currently existing lights on Town
Property. (NOTE: Town Mgr. Bonnie Therrien
stated in writing on Mon. 3 Jan.
2005, "There is an agreement that any lights now in
place will stay as is." However she and The Council declined to
share this information with the community at large in the Official Explanatory
Text being sent to town residents.)
A NO vote means that the existing Chapter 101, Lighting,
of the Code of Wethersfield, will remain
as is.
*********************
Petition 2. (This has been
referred to as the John Miller Petition)
Pursuant to Section 312 of the Charter of the Town of Wethersfield, the
undersigned qualified electors of said Town of Wethersfield, petition the
Town Council to adopt the following ordinance:Pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes $8-2,
municipal property shall be exempt from regulations prescribed by the Planning
and Zoning Commission. Notwithstanding this exemption, the Town shall
voluntarily adhere to regulations of the Planning and Zoning Commission unless
the Town Council determines, after a public hearing, that it is in the best
interest of the Town for a specific purpose not to adhere to a regulation that
conflicts with that purpose”. For additional information on this important issue Click on the
following two links. Link
1 http://www.q2no.org/maild/q2no-mail-05505-kes.html
Link 2 http://pages.cthome.net/ryoung0/map/lands-at-risk-wtxa-4-6-05.html
Please remember to vote on May 24, 2005! Bob Young
*************
Martin Lyons
Stonington Tax Association
Subject: Praising
Donna McCalla’s Spreadsheet on Property Tax Increases
May 5, 2005
Susan, Donna's spread sheet is great. Please tell her
that Stonington residents
defeated the referendum on 5/4. The next referendum is set for
5/23. Martin
*************
Rocky Hill Council Backs Budget With No Tax Increase
Spending Climbs
By 5 Percent
By ANN MARIE SOMMA , Courant Staff Writer
May 10 2005 ROCKY HILL --
The town council on Monday approved a $48.5 million budget for 2005-06 that
will not include an increase in the tax rate.
The council voted 8-1 to approve the budget, which calls
for a 5 percent increase in spending for the fiscal year. The budget leaves the
tax rate at 25.8 mills.
The budget includes $22.8 million for town expenditures,
and $23 million for the board of education.
*************
From the Yankee Institute for Public Policy
Philip Gressel Center for Tax and Budget Policy
May 2, 2005
To download a copy of the Fiscal Focus "Connecticut's Tax Burden: An Overview," visit the Yankee
Institute's website at www.yankeeinstitute.org. D. Dowd Muska can be contacted at (860) 729-1262 and dowd@yankeeinstitute.org.
Tax Freedom Day Arrives -- Finally
Think Tank Comments on State's Immense Tax Burden, Issues New Guide to Connecticut Taxation
Hartford, May 2, 2005 -- On the eve of Connecticut's Tax
Freedom Day -- the date on which the Tax Foundation estimates state residents
stop working for government at the federal, state, and local levels -- D. Dowd Muska, the Yankee Institute's Philip Gressel
Fellow for Tax and Budget Policy, offered the following statement:
When the Nutmeg State's taxpayers head
off to work tomorrow, they'll finally start earning income that they can keep
for themselves. Over 120 days into 2005, Connecticut's Tax Freedom Day
has finally arrived -- later than it did in the other 49 states.
Our state's tax burden is a bipartisan scandal. For decades,
elected officials from both major political parties have raised taxes and fees
to the point where the Nutmeg State faces the
heaviest tax burden in the nation. Politicians in Washington, Hartford, and your home
town have consistently chosen to make government bigger and broader, and then
passed the bill on to you.
The lateness of Tax Freedom Day in Connecticut is not due merely
to the confiscatory federal income taxes assessed on Connecticut's high-income
earners. The combined state-local tax burden for Connecticut is now the 12th
highest in the nation.
It's outrageous that Connecticut, a wealthy state where
problems such as poverty, crime, and lack of health insurance are all well
below national averages, taxes its citizens to support a state budget that in
inflation-adjusted, per capita terms has grown by more than 440 percent since
1970.
But let's not forget the local level. Connecticut's property
taxpayers are burdened by both unfunded state mandates that drive up the cost
of municipal government and local officials who constantly search for new ways
to boost their towns' budgets.
Unjustified school spending, absurd bonding commitments,
generous compensation packages to government employees, massive corporate
welfare, and outrageous subsidies to the arts are rampant at the state and
local level. Until unnecessary spending is curbed -- and unneeded programs and
agencies eliminated -- tax freedom in Connecticut will continue to
arrive far too late in the year.
If Connecticut's economy were booming,
our heavy tax burden might be easier to bear. Unfortunately, Connecticut suffers from the
worst of both worlds: an unfair tax burden and a sluggish economy.
That should come as no surprise. Research consistently shows
that high taxes retard economic growth and drive companies and residents into
other jurisdictions.
Connecticut's tax burden is not the result of evil people,
but bad policies based on misguided ideas and assumptions. Happily, there are
alternatives to the Nutmeg State's high taxes and
stagnant economy.
Free-market, pro-growth policies have proven their
effectiveness in other states and around the world. It is possible to lower
taxes and reduce government spending, while maintaining the necessary and
legitimate functions of the public sector. The Yankee Institute exists to
document these ideas and reforms, and apply them to the Nutmeg State.
Connecticut's hardworking taxpayers deserve fundamental
reform of the way governments at the local, state, and federal levels fund
their activities. It's a disgrace that our state faces the heaviest tax burden
in the nation.
Today the Yankee Institute announces the release of its
first "Fiscal Focus," a new and easy-to-use tool for taxpayers,
elected officials, and members of the media. "Fiscal Focus" is
designed to describe, in simple language and numbers, the tax and spending
policies that damage economic freedom in Connecticut.
To download a copy of the Fiscal Focus "Connecticut's Tax Burden: An
Overview," visit the Yankee Institute's website at www.yankeeinstitute.org.
D. Dowd Muska can be contacted at (860) 729-1262 and dowd@yankeeinstitute.org.
***********
Bob Green, rgreen619@snet.net
Salem Republican Town Committee
Subject: Correction on
Spreadsheet
May 5, 2005
Sue,
I have corrected Salem's line item on
the tax comparison and sent it back to you. Salem's budget is
approved by referendum. The town meeting is a final look to make changes
(no $ additions just reductions) before it goes to referendum. Bob Green Chairman, Salem Republican Town Committee,
Member, Salem Board of
Education
*************
TODAY’S NEWS: A
brief summary is offered below.
Understanding that our lives are influenced by world events, FCTO
provides interesting news articles on global and national issues. Is there an interesting article you would
like us to include in our next Tax Talk publication? Send it to fctopresident@ctact.org.
Fire Departments Try Fees To
Cover Costs
May 15, 2005,
Gregory Seay, Hartford
Courant
http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-firefees.artmay15,0,5383327.story?coll=hc-headlines-local
*************
Scathing report on IRS finally may see daylight
Robert Novak, Sun Times
Columnist, 5/5/05
http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak/cst-edt-novak05.html
*************
British memo indicates Bush made intelligence
fit Iraq policy
By Warren P. Strobel and John Walcott , Knight Ridder Newspapers
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/nation/11574296.htm
*************
Town Gives WFSB Large Tax Break
Station Gets $1.9 Million Incentive Package
May 4, 2005,
By ANN MARIE SOMMA, Courant Staff Writer http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-rocwfsb0504.artmay04,0,3803508.story?coll=hc-headlines-local
*************
Property taxes rising nationwide
By Ron Scherer | Staff writer of The Christian
Science Monitor http://search.csmonitor.com/2004/1203/p01s01-usec.htm
*************
Testimony to stay secret: Transcript of Rowland, others on
CRRA-Enron deal kept sealed
By Don Michak,
Journal Inquirer, May 7, 2005
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=14486363&BRD=985&PAG=461&dept_id=161556&rfi=6
*************