[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6286823,"mediaKeyId","2556557-47c240781989125d632a5b0717449774","parentId",2556557,"title","Votes at a glance: Cheshire council approves minutes, town‑clerk appropriations, contracts and appointments (unanimous)","audioSeconds",247,"startMs",5984000,"endMs",6231000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2556557-47c240781989125d632a5b0717449774&start=5984&end=6231","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2556557-47c240781989125d632a5b0717449774/thumbnail_5984000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6286823/Connecticut/Votes-at-a-glance-Cheshire-council-approves-minutes-townclerk-appropriations-contracts-and-appointments-unanimous","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6286823-4ca04c908115dffe25ee344cdd556948/orig.mp4?Expires=1771164394&Signature=FotIcQPUEhXdU81qBd-oct1xEyu4hEw8dCFsIUlH-lylaq9u0QWtr5cSLxAvC5OfILPhFKBG~KWAL~DqoU6gOD1dgk7Q736W0S-CLIrHTSAIq9tfgm6S37t~ZNI6F4H~j7lkqzWa2ZpzWduZIJwJYyZ~8zwHLRl~tSfL3IFfgXzZeiONwCwrlz3ImopK-X1-v0KNYPsSCw2ASKDLjMCLNCruqxgOQUr1sC8m8NPTBxULKDvv5mQJuQkM-FOv5ByVuVj8QfO4oPvjUX7PjeNZRvAfYlrFnIWpkFMLKo-fhOZY7FNkpQulqgJ6JxJCQtJ8-7ZjCgOpYtEstrKLbaFTpA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Town Council of Cheshire, CT","date","2025-03-11T00:00:00Z","article","The Town of Cheshire council on March 11 approved a series of routine resolutions and appointments, voting unanimously on each item during the meeting.

Key votes recorded on the agenda:

- Approval of meeting minutes: Council approved the minutes for the Feb. 11, 2025 regular meeting and Feb. 25, 2025 special meeting as amended. The motion to amend and approve was moved by Councilor Jim Jenks and seconded by Don Walsh; the council voted unanimously to adopt the amended minutes.

- Consent calendar: The council approved the consent calendar (Resolution 031125‑1). The motion passed unanimously.

- Appropriation of town clerk funds (Resolution 031125‑2): The council approved appropriations from three special town‑clerk accounts — Historic Document Preservation ($15,000), Community Investment ($10,000) and Mortgage Electronic Registration System account ($15,000) — to support record preservation, temporary help, binders and other office needs. The motion passed unanimously.

- Renewal of hearing officer contract (Resolution 031125‑3): The council approved a successor appointment of Bruce W. Diamond as hearing officer for the term April 1, 2025 to March 31, 2026, with a $300 monthly retainer to cover various municipal hearings. The motion passed unanimously.

- Commitment to participate in a regional natural hazard mitigation planning grant program (Resolution 031125‑4): The council authorized the town’s participation and agreed that required matching funds will be allocated from the planning department budget in FY2026 and FY2027. The motion passed unanimously.

- Adoption of town manager’s 2025 goals and objectives (Resolution 031125‑5): The council approved the manager’s goals and objectives document for 2025. The motion passed unanimously.

- Appointments and housekeeping: The council confirmed several committee and commission appointments and alternates (Historic District Commission, Beautification Committee, Energy Commission, Inland Wetlands/Water Pollution Control, Park and Recreation and Youth & Human Services among others). All appointment votes recorded were unanimous.

Most motions were moved and seconded from the dais; the clerk and mayor called for voice votes and each motion passed without recorded opposition. The council did not take roll‑call tallies or record individual yes/no votes in the public minutes for these items; meeting remarks show unanimous approval on all matters that came to a vote.

The council also heard extended public comment on a separate item (animal control/pound conditions) and received several department reports and project updates. No additional formal or contested policy votes were taken at the March 11 meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Cheshire Town Council 3-11-25","oneSentenceSummary","At its March 11 meeting the Town of Cheshire council unanimously approved meeting minutes, the consent calendar, appropriations from town‑clerk funds, a hearing officer contract renewal, a regional grant commitment and several appointments and resolutions.","taxTitle","Town of Cheshire, New Haven County, Connecticut","taxId",70158,"location","Connecticut","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6286828,"Town manager proposes $150.2 million budget; recommends 31.16 mills, which would raise average Cheshire property tax about 12.7%",1793,6514000,8307000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2556557-47c240781989125d632a5b0717449774&start=6514&end=8307","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2556557-47c240781989125d632a5b0717449774/thumbnail_6514000.jpg","/articles/6286828/Connecticut/Town-manager-proposes-1502-million-budget-recommends-3116-mills-which-would-raise-average-Cheshire-property-tax-about-127","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6286828-1ac88deea8e9f45288f8ef22ab852410/orig.mp4?Expires=1771164394&Signature=gONETXoUiVjmW6-Qy6J3lGW-MS8SWUeTEF-HyYB8WgWtgIHQY-cws563S9cB1ybjXwxtoZaZHYLeTwoAiElnn6S9qdlBTtOOon6R1p9pjUeVA3LE6M7lWT01ujEQE4Zw8WKm-7H1YHpZpDWl48D5ERNbzq17kokdyuAadKj-TzUlNe6okE8krRHKZlSSi75A~pIIiMn~1nNY4UrP1fx0GwQr0r~-Jje-q0ndib4P2RP~qEL~XJTEiqUjANanQdRUjTll2RNzxDfvH-7j2I6UEUnInLN~MhO-76i6QWL7sxieWAH6DP6jJL4FnhD6nYpQtSptsLjMNI0A9gNK6yWSUA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Town Manager Sean Kimball on March 11 presented a proposed $150.2 million operating budget for fiscal 2026 and recommended a tax rate of 31.16 mills, a move that would raise the average Cheshire property tax bill by roughly 12.7%, the manager said.

Kimball told the Town Council that the proposed budget reflects a number of revenue losses and rising costs that together create a substantial fiscal gap. “If you take all of those revenue factors … that sums up to $4,700,000 in lost revenue,” he said, describing reductions in state aid and one‑time federal and town funds. He added that, “that alone … represents a 1.16 mil increase in taxes or about a 4.2% tax increase before we even talk about expenditures.”

Major expenditure drivers cited in the presentation included the Board of Education’s recommended increase — a $6.2 million request that Kimball said included higher medical‑benefit costs and staffing for enrollment growth — and a projected 28.4% jump in debt service, largely tied to financing two new elementary school projects.

Kimball said the proposed total operating budget is $150,200,000, a 7.34% increase from the current year, and that the recommended mill rate of 31.16 (up from 27.46) equals a 3.7‑mill shift. Using the town’s revaluation figures, the manager illustrated the average homeowner impact: a property assessed at the town average would see annual taxes rise from about $8,175 to $9,277, an increase of roughly $1,102.

Kimball attributed part of the revenue shortfall to state actions and federal funding timing: he cited about $900,000 in cuts to state pilot and education cost‑sharing (ECS) aid, the end of a municipal revenue‑sharing payment budgeted at $500,000, and the one‑time use of ARPA funds earlier in the budget cycle that are no longer available. The manager told the council that changes in motor‑vehicle valuation methodology reduced the grand list by about $27.6 million and that a large share of recent grand‑list growth from the Stonebridge Crossing project is subject to a credit‑enhancement agreement that directs most of those taxes into the TIF arrangement rather than the general fund.

Other line items the presentation highlighted included a proposed restoration of the community pool subsidy to about $500,000 (up roughly $200,000 from the current-year subsidy), rising liability and workers’ compensation insurance, and requested raises and minimum‑wage adjustments that increased personnel costs across town departments.

Kimball also showed the town’s projected reserves, saying his recommended budget would use $1.25 million of reserves and leaving an estimated unassigned fund balance of about $17.2 million — roughly 12.36% of expenditures, above the council’s 10% policy target.

The manager proposed a modestly scaled first year of capital projects — about $7.7 million — and noted that the five‑year capital plan includes higher borrowing that will add to future debt service. He said he reduced several capital requests in order to moderate debt forecasts.

Kimball closed by giving the council a schedule of budget workshops and hearings. The town council will hold a public hearing on the proposed budget and a sequence of departmental and capital workshops in March and April before a planned adoption in late April. He encouraged residents to follow the budget documents posted on the town website and attend the meetings.

Council members thanked Kimball for the presentation and noted there will be detailed reviews in the coming weeks; the board of education’s request and debt service projections will be the major focus of those workshops. No vote on the budget was taken at the March 11 meeting.","Town Manager Sean Kimball presented a $150.2 million operating budget for fiscal 2026 on March 11, citing a $6.2 million Board of Education request and rising debt service as major drivers and recommending a 31.16‑mill tax rate.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6286832,"Residents press Cheshire council for answers after Department of Agriculture reports on pound conditions",3069,448000,3517000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2556557-47c240781989125d632a5b0717449774&start=448&end=3517","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2556557-47c240781989125d632a5b0717449774/thumbnail_448000.jpg","/articles/6286832/Connecticut/Residents-press-Cheshire-council-for-answers-after-Department-of-Agriculture-reports-on-pound-conditions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6286832-abaaf265a6314646adc5fb5638dc9a94/orig.mp4?Expires=1771164394&Signature=b4M0rgWbeYFxQjJQOYwGZIxf-xuUaN0tl7yj4DilzFF6Tae7uQ-7Y858lz-XzbW4So88nmeBCUfYDKtxatAZEtB0GuuHVNRPgeOVp8yTpiVlKMU0VO1HID-0MfUJwmyUkpCDAVDBNQF0uCMyXIpH-NnVNimdfNMXWFt-JzfMwFBYl07FW9K8FYc7Xfzl0Pd5iDbj8MCwnezSNnP29qtu4ubTY-yyV5JXlMxV4uXYvBmR8wMk8UTEuD2Q2Drl7FlglJAK-Eii0~Bzg80f9Qhzfnl~MVgcGdpB49OLFgYBUD-GpZeMX-~SaF0NvqICCN~pc1oVjvEyS6nOmUo7A4D0eA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Dozens of residents and animal-welfare advocates pressed the Town of Cheshire council on March 11 for action after multiple speakers cited Department of Agriculture reports and veterinary records they say show neglect of animals seized in a cruelty case.

Speakers described repeated problems at the town pound, cited veterinary findings they said showed treatable conditions that were not addressed and asked why a long‑time animal control officer remained on the job while an outside investigation proceeds.

The concerns centered on two animals specifically named by multiple speakers: “Tiny,” a small Shih Tzu whose necropsy and medical records were read into the record, and “Lily,” another dog whose treatment was discussed. Several speakers said the state Department of Agriculture and treating veterinarians concluded the animals’ conditions could have been treated.

“Please show the town you really care about what goes on with our public officers,” said Diane Schaffer, a Cheshire resident, during public comment. “While you ignore our pleas for help, you’re potentially putting other animals’ lives at risk and the town itself at risk.”

Other residents described veterinary records and witness statements they said were part of the Department of Agriculture’s review. A Meriden Animal Hospital veterinary technician’s email included in public comment said Tiny had “urine scalding, urine stained fur, multiple mats and stools stuck to the hair … grade 4 dental disease” and that Tiny’s condition worsened between visits. Marina Bagliore, who said she had reviewed the DOAG interview transcript, quoted a line attributed to the treating veterinarian: “Condition presented could be treated.”

Holly Fontaine and other speakers described examples they said appeared in medical records: abscessed eyes and jaws, severe dental disease and skin problems. Amy Lynn Gentile, a professional groomer, testified about matted fur, overgrown nails and a grooming environment she described as unsafe and unsanitary.

Not all commentary was accusatory toward town staff. Retired veterinarian Bob Giddings said the sudden arrival of many dogs at the pound “was a crisis” and that personnel and volunteers “did the best they could under extremely challenging circumstances,” while urging continued oversight and constructive cooperation.

Mayor Peter J. Talbot and the council did not take further public comment on the matter at the meeting. Talbot told the room that the council has commissioned an independent third‑party investigation and that, “in order to ensure the integrity of that investigation, the town council will have no further comment until that investigation has been completed.” That restriction on public comment by the council was repeated by the chair at the meeting’s close.

Several speakers urged personnel action, including suspension or firing of the animal control officer identified in the public testimony, and asked why a warrant described in Department of Agriculture filings was not pursued by prosecutors. Others urged the council to release more information to the public; several said they were frustrated by what they described as lack of transparency and delay.

The council did not vote on any personnel matters during the meeting. Council members acknowledged receipt of the public comments and said an independent investigation is underway; the council’s statement that it will not comment further was the only specific, board‑level instruction reported at the meeting. The investigation’s timeline, next steps and scope were not specified at the meeting.

The town manager and councilmembers who spoke at the meeting reiterated that the council would not comment further while the independent review is in progress. Residents in the audience said they expected the investigation’s findings to be released to the public when complete and to include steps for accountability and facility upgrades.

The council meeting agenda did not include any motions or votes on animal control policy or personnel; further action by the council on the subject will depend on the independent investigator’s report and any legal or personnel guidance that follows.","Dozens of residents and animal-welfare advocates addressed the Town of Cheshire council on March 11, pressing for accountability after state Department of Agriculture reports and veterinary records raised questions about care at Cheshire Animal Control.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Cheshire council approves minutes, town‑clerk appropriations, contracts and appointments (unanimous)

Town manager proposes $150.2 million budget; recommends 31.16 mills, which would raise average Cheshire property tax about 12.7%

Residents press Cheshire council for answers after Department of Agriculture reports on pound conditions