Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Referendum topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Willington board narrows second‑referendum plan after public outcry over school budget and taxes
Summary
After dozens of public commenters decried a recent failed referendum, the Willington Board of Finance voted to send a revised budget to a second town referendum, proposing a net tax increase target near 4.9% achieved by $100,000 from fund balance, $100,000 in Board of Education cuts and $70,000 in town savings; board members and school officials warned that further cuts would reduce staff and services.
The Willington Board of Finance voted May 7 to send a revised municipal budget to a second town referendum after a lengthy public hearing in which residents criticized the timing, clarity and size of the original proposals.
Chair (speaker S1) told the meeting the May 5 vote reflected deep voter concern: "the largest margin of no votes was 191 for the K through 8 budget," he said, and noted the legislature released roughly $193,000 in state funds that must be used to reduce taxation rather than be placed in savings.
Why it matters: The board’s action sets a concrete path back to voters and trims the initial proposal — which had shown a 7.7% spending increase and a 7.7% tax impact on ballots — to a lower net tax increase that board members hope will be more acceptable to residents while preserving critical services.
What the board approved: Under a motion carried at the meeting, the board will target a net tax increase of about 4.9% by applying $100,000 from the town’s fund balance, reducing the Board of Education budget by $100,000 and finding $70,000 in savings across town operating and CIP budgets. The board asked the Board of Selectmen to call a town meeting to set a date for the second referendum and directed staff to publish updated budget materials and explanatory communications by Monday.
Public input and tensions: Dozens of residents urged more transparency and smaller increases. "I suggested that we keep it between 2 and a half and 3% so that we can pass," said resident Pete Tanaka (S10). Others said modest monthly increases matter for people on fixed incomes. Viviana Barelli (S16), who identified herself as a nurse and a senior on a fixed income, said, "That 20, $30 is... it means a lot to some people." Several speakers also warned against using one‑time grants or supplemental funds to cover ongoing expenses.
School impacts and board warnings: The Board of Education representative (S8) told the finance board that the district has limited discretionary spending and warned that deeper reductions would directly affect staffing and programs. "If you add another $300,000," S8 said, "you're talking about seven or eight positions total," listing cuts that could include paraprofessionals, world language and library staff and some extracurricular supports.
Library and small programs at risk: The library director (S22) described current cuts already scheduled in the failed budget and said additional reductions would require slashing hours and program materials. She said a $28,707 administrative reduction would force a 28.5% cut in open hours, Monday closures effective July 1 and reductions in materials budgets.
Next steps: The board instructed town staff to prepare a clear explanation of what was cut and what the estimated tax savings will be, post the revised materials publicly, and coordinate with the Board of Education and other departments ahead of a town meeting. The board also discussed broader community outreach, including in‑person events and social media posts, to help voters understand the choices before a second referendum.
The board will announce the town‑meeting schedule once the Board of Selectmen completes the legal notices and calendars; staff noted a reasonable timetable could place a town meeting and referendum within 17–21 days if deadlines and legal notices align.
