Town Council Candidate Questionnaire, Answer #5

Town Council Meeting PHILIP THIBODEAU PHOTO

As a service to our readers, we will be republishing the replies to our Town Council Candidate Questionnaire question by question, one each day until Election Day. This was the fifth query:

If $5 million per year was suddenly subtracted from Southington’s coffers, how would you want the town government to address this challenge?

The replies, ordered by candidate last name, are as follows:

Paul Chaplinsky (R)

This scenario is not unfamiliar. In recent years, the state legislature has withheld over $1 million in previously committed funding. Each time, we’ve responded collaboratively—working with department heads and boards to adapt spending and revenue plans responsibly while minimizing disruption to residents and services. I would approach any future shortfall with that same teamwork and strategic mindset, ensuring we continue to meet our obligations without unnecessary burden on taxpayers.

Jennifer Clock (R)

We’ve encountered shortfalls before, and this is a situational handling. The council must assess where the shortfall is coming from, what the effect will be and then determine how best to proceed. There are levers you can pull depending on this assessment and we’ve done this each budget season to pass balanced budgets each time despite those shortfalls and unfunded mandates coming down from the state.

Michael DelSanto (R)

The State of Connecticut continues to impose unfunded mandates and excessive spending requirements on Southington, often without providing sufficient financial support for their implementation. In 2025 alone, Southington’s taxpayers were responsible for nearly $1.5 million in costs resulting from these state mandates. These additional financial obligations directly contributed to an increase in the town’s mill rate, placing a greater burden on residents. This ongoing challenge underscores the need for greater equity and support from state coffers to ensure that mandates do not unfairly impact Southington’s taxpayers.

George Doherty (D)

The best way to address periodic shortfalls in revenue is to manage costs in advance. The fiscal cliff Southington ran into the last three years was the result of using short-term federal Covid funding for operating expenses. While this helped the Republican-dominated town government keep taxes low while maintaining spending on its priorities, and likely helped it win an election or two, this also created a large revenue shortfall which the town is paying for now with significantly higher taxes.

Another way the town can better manage itself fiscally is to stop spending on peripheral but expensive discretionary purchases like golf course development rights.

Charles E. Green, Jr. (D)

To address this, I would want the town to make sure that every identity, meaning every person, company and/or the like, is paying their fair share of taxes. Taxing one sector of society more than the others is not fair and causes a divide among people. In times like this, society needs to be brought together to address this type of problem instead of being divided. The saying is true, “United we stand, divided we fall”. I would want the Town to aggressively try and sell some of the vacant lots in and around town to allow for new businesses to be created. This in turn will generate new jobs, and more taxable income from the new employees and new businesses.

 

Shawn Grindle (D)

Well… looks like the year-round fritter booth isn’t happening, huh? [Referring to answer to Question #4] If we suddenly lost around 3% of the town budget, some really tough choices would have to be made. A fiscal cliff like that could destabilize essential services if not handled carefully. We’d need to immediately create a clear roadmap out of the crisis - one that focuses on immediate, short-term, and long-term stability.

The first step would be to implement a temporary hiring freeze on nonessential positions and contracts, consider using a limited portion of reserves as a short bridge to avoid drastic service cuts, and defer any capital projects that can reasonably be postponed. That bridge, using rainy-day funds, must be a one-time fix,poor planning, like past practice of using COVID relief funds for recurring expenses, only creates false financial security and sets us up for a bigger mess later. In the long run, we’d need to explore responsible revenue options, conduct efficiency audits, seek shared services with neighboring towns, and identify where temporary cuts could do the least harm. Above all, I’d call for open public forums to build trust and ensure every decision is made transparently and equitably for all taxpayers and town services. 

A crisis like this would be an opportunity for real leadership. I know the team I’d want working on a problem like this and it’s not the team whose poor planning likely caused the mess to begin with. Take a look at our BOF candidates we are running a great team that would help the Town Council dig out of a crisis such as this.

Kristen Marie Guida (D)

If the town faced a $5 million deficit, I would work closely with town leaders and the Board of Finance to identify areas where we could trim excess without compromising essential services or education. Responsible stewardship means maintaining efficiency while preserving the operations that keep Southington thriving.

Jim Morelli (R)

Like in the previous question, that small percentage would likely not yield much change in our overall picture but if it did it would likely go to one-time expenses like equipment police fire and public works, park and public building upgrades etc. It should not be used to increase any rolling overhead costs that would increase our annual budget and ultimately increase taxes.

Tony Morrison (R)

I would propose using the levers we have developed previously that Republicans on the BOF and TC have built up over the years. These include:

1.     Pushing out capital spending. Our five year capital spending plan has some serious investments we plan to make beginning in 2026 totaling nearly $300 Million. They would have to be reviewed and moved out in order to minimize annual debt payments.

2.     Disciplined spending cuts mechanism. The first year I was on the BOF we were faced with massive cuts in grants by the State of around $3 Million. We released budget dollars to both BOE and General Government on a quarterly basis only if they had made targeted cuts in their budgets going forward.

3.     Across-the board limits to spending. We have made serious investments in our services over the last three years; partly to combat inflation and State unfunded mandates, and partly to make progress. These have averaged 4-5% increase annually. We would limit spending increases in the budget process to a much smaller amount of 2-3% a year until the crisis was resolved.

4.     Tax increases. Only if necessary to preserve essential services.

Knowledge of what can be done is one thing; the critical element for Councilors has to be sound judgment. Balancing revenues and services is difficult at the best of times to get right in most budgets we pass - it is far more so during emergency situations.

Chris Palmieri (D)

If Southington suddenly lost $5 million per year, I would suggest we prioritize spending to continue providing essential services. I would focus first on maintaining public safety, maintaining investments in critical infrastructure, and meeting contractual obligations. I would also look for efficiencies, eliminate unnecessary costs, and explore alternative revenue sources to minimize the impact on residents’ taxes.  When decisions are finalized, it is important to communicate transparently with the community so residents understand the choices being made. 

Joshua Serafino (R)

If Southington suddenly lost $5 million from the budget, we would have to carefully look at where every dollar is being spent. The first step would be to review spending in each department and find ways to cut costs without taking away the services people depend on. Transparency would matter a lot here. Residents deserve to know where adjustments are being made and why. With smart budgeting and good communication, I believe we can manage a shortfall like that while keeping Southington running strong.

David Zoni (D)

This is somewhat of a common-sense question. $5 million represents approximately 2.6% of a $188 million dollar budget. The solution to this situation would range from least favorable options to more favorable options or a combination of thereof. I would shy away from simply raising property taxes to close the shortfall (worst option) to pursuing replacement funding from other sources (State or Federal grants). But at the end of the day, we would have to assess the current budget, define expenditures that must be left in place in order to maintain essential public services and review the expenditures that reflect our community’s wants verses needs. We would need to identify budgets cuts that would have the least impact on essential services and review our future capital expenditure plans to mitigate the shortfall in revenue. A prolonged shortfall would require aggressive efforts to grow the Grand List and a rethinking of our needs and wants while implementing budgetary adjustments accordingly. This is the same logic that individuals would use to balance their household budgets.