Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fund Balance And Referendums topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board debate revisits last year’s referendums and use of fund balance
Summary
Board of Finance member Brian Loveless recalled three failed referendums and a council adoption last year, arguing the underlying issue is spending growth; members also discussed last year’s unassigned fund balance and whether one‑time cash was used to cover recurring expenses.
Board of Finance member Brian Loveless reviewed last year’s budget history and media coverage at the April 9 workshop, saying previous referendums failed three times before the Town Council adopted a budget. Loveless cited a CT Insider headline and said the deeper problem is spending growth rather than insufficient tax increases. "Let this sink in - There were three failed referendums last year and the Town Council unilaterally went against the voters and increased the budget," he said.
Several board members and other participants discussed the town’s year‑end fund balances. Kathleen Johnson and Cathy Salchert noted last year’s unassigned fund balance and leftover capital funds: the minutes record roughly $3.8 million unassigned funds and about $1.36 million leftover from capital projects (totaling about $5.179 million of residual funds referenced in the discussion). Members cautioned that using one‑time funds for recurring expenses creates risk; Salchert emphasized the difference between one‑time transfers and funding ongoing salaries or services.
The discussion did not change the BOF’s recommendation but framed the political and fiscal context voters will consider in May. Chair Lowry asked Loveless for a concrete alternative number to propose during the workshop, and Loveless asked the boards to identify additional savings beyond a listed $263,561 of illustrative cuts.
