Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Funding Allocation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
RSU 4 additional-local funding passed by ballot; residents debate town-level tax impact of allocation formula
Summary
Article 13, which sets additional local funds above the state EPS model, passed by written ballot and sparked debate about uneven town impacts under the state allocation formula.
Article 13, asking for additional local funds above the state's Essential Programs and Services (EPS) allocation, was decided by written ballot and carried. After an amendment to reduce the request to $4,000,000 failed on a secret ballot (reported 14 yes, 22 no), the main motion for $4,572,097 was approved in a subsequent secret-ballot count reported as 22 yes and 8 no.
Several residents raised concerns that the EPS allocation model and the district's application of it produce disproportionate tax impacts across the three towns. One speaker noted the formula raised Litchfield's tax obligation by "over 8%" in their calculation and urged caution. Board members and the superintendent explained cuts to this amount would force the board to determine which line items to reduce; those reductions historically have tended to affect facilities and maintenance.
Why it matters: Article 13 determines the portion of the budget funded locally beyond the state's EPS calculation and directly affects local property-tax bills. The written-ballot process is required by statute for this article; clerks reported the ballot counts to the meeting.
