Board of Finance Recommends Budget Trims, November Date for School Referendum

The six Board of Finance members meeting in the Weichsel Center Assembly Room. TOWN OF SOUTHINGTON VIDEO SCREENSHOT

At its March 25 meeting, the Board of Finance took a series of significant votes on next year’s town budget and a potential referendum on an elementary school rebuild. As a result of these actions, the picture for next year’s budget, and the all-important mill rate, become a bit more clear.

Elementary School Referendum

The Board began its meeting with a public hearing on a referendum item that would authorize $86,675,560 in borrowing for the rebuilding of Kelley Elementary, new construction at South End Elementary, and the closure of Flanders Elementary as a school. Ultimately, the Board voted to advance the referendum language – but to put it on the ballot of the November general election, rather than in June, as the Board of Education had recommended.

Debate on the issue was dominated by questions of timing, cost, and benefit. School Superintendent Steve Madancy stressed the importance of the state reimbursement rate. Under current rules, a 50% rate could apply if the district reaches enrollment levels for the constructed space within eight years. An additional 15% reimbursement for the entire project could come if the new building include special education or preschool spaces that meet certain criteria. Once the anticipated reimbursements are factored in, Madancy said the costs to Southington taxpayers are more likely to be in the $31 to $39 million range.

But, Madancy pointed out, those rates are subject to change by the state legislature, which could raise or lower them. The success of the application also depends on the town’s delegation being able to make a successful case for it at the Capitol.

“If we wait until November, then the grant application won’t be submitted until next June 30th [of 2027],” Madancy noted. Meanwhile, he said, the costs associated with construction are unlikely to go down, and funding could be harder to obtain.

Madancy acknowledged the fiscal cross-winds that the project is encountering. “We do understand, given the recent revaluation, given our proposed budgets, and given the timing of this and its cost, that it’s a complex situation, and we want to acknowledge that as well,” he said.

During the public hearing, six residents spoken in favor of a June referendum, while three asked either for a postponement or a reconsideration of the whole plan.

When it came time for the Board to deliberate, member Stephen Salerno raised concerns about the impact to taxpayers and the possible political fallout. He argued that a November referendum would see better voter turnout and more informed voters. His sentiments were echoed by Kevin Beaudoin and Ed Pocock.

Later in the meeting, the Board voted 3-3 not to advance the referendum to the Town Council, and to take no action. Following a brief recess, however, Town Manager Alex Ricciardone reported that Town Attorney Louis Martocchio III had determined that the Town Charter required a vote on whether or not to advance the item. “A failed recommendation is not a recommendation or a non-recommendation,” he stated, citing Martocchio.

A subsequent vote by the Board to put the referendum on the November ballot passed 4-2, with Katie Wade and Pocock voting ‘no.’

 

General Budget Votes

The Board then took on the 2026-27 Fiscal Year Budget, section by section. It unanimously passed motions to approve funding for Animal Control at $220,634; $6,810,193 for the Sewer Fund; $7,998,173 for the first year of the Capital Improvement Plan; $12,717,051 for Debt Service; and $55,558,563 for the General Government Operating Budget. Calendar House funding of $709,048 passed 5-0-1, with Pocock abstaining due to his service as a driver at the senior center.

The General Government budget that passed did not include the Fire Department’s request for three new hires. The Police Department saw cuts to its overtime budget, and rejection of its request for a new car for the Chief of Police.

Actions taken by the Board of Finance are recommendations for the Town Council, which has the final say in all such matters. If the Council wishes to make further cuts to the budget, it only needs a simple majority to do so. However, if it wishes to restore funding that the Board of Finance had recommended be cut, a supermajority vote of the Council is required. Cuts made by the Board of the Finance are thus more difficult to reverse.

 

School Spending Cut by $1.6 Million

The biggest budget item – $126,799,132 for the Board of Education Operating Budget — passed 4-2, with Salerno and Wade voting no. The figure was $3,499,942, or 2.7% less than the $130,073,074 requested by the Board of Education.

This 2.7% cut was made up of two parts. The first, which was crafted by Board of Finance member Joe Labieniec, involved shifting and reallocating funds for self-insurance in a way that left all parties – the town, the Board, and the union – satisfied with the result.

The second part will have a more tangible impact: a $1.6 million cut to the school system budget. If this cut is upheld by Town Council, it will require the Board of Education and the Superintendent to work together to find $1.6 million in cuts to the proposed budget.

Wade explained her dissenting vote by reading a written statement. She first thanked the Board of Education and district staffers for their work before warning of the consequences of what she called a “pattern” of under-funding education.

“We have to explore tools that other municipalities use to help residents stay in their homes, including income-based tax relief and deferral programs,” she said, acknowledging both the varying income levels of people in the Southington community and the global economic strains raising costs. However, she added, “the reality is that over the past several years, the town has not kept pace with the actual cost of operating our schools. (…) What were once small shortfalls have compounded into larger structural deficits that are showing up in staffing pressures, program limitations and real tradeoffs for students.”

After the vote, Board of Education member Colleen Clark spoke in her personal capacity to reinforce some of Wade’s points, saying she was “saddened” by the funding level approved for education at the meeting.

“With reduced funding the impact will be immediate and real,” she argued, saying that class sizes, course offerings, and strains on educators and administrators would result from the reduced budget ask.

“Education is an area where cuts carry long-term consequences, and investments yield lasting returns,” Clark said, mentioning a positive correlation between home values and quality schools.

Next Steps

At the meeting, Board of Finance Chair John Leary said the budget as originally presented would have meant a 9.5% tax increase, which the Board had whittled down to 5.9% – a percentage that is still “the highest since I’ve been here,” he noted. A majority of that increase was due to what he termed “people costs,” such as insurance.

Leary later communicated to the Outsider that he expects the final mill rate to end up very close to 24, i.e. 2.4%. He also observed that getting the budget and consequent tax increase down to 5.0% would require another $1.5 million in cuts.

Leary is preparing to make a detailed presentation on this budget recommendation during the April 6 Town Council meeting, which will take into account the various economic stresses and tailwinds currently affecting Southington residents and businesses.