Letters to the Editor - October 5, 2012

Republican speech-making does not resolve Winchester’s issues

The Republican letter in last week’s issue (“Republicans: Zero budget is not enough”) is one more example of moving the goalpost. There is plenty of speech-making and conjecture (they even refer to the decimated fund balance that they created!).  But, there are no facts and no meaningful plans.  In fact, most of what they are talking about can only be accomplished by the state or federal government.   

Suggesting that an annual budget “remedy Winsted’s problems” is cynical and incorrect.  The larger issues of revitalizing the downtown, shifting the burden of publicly funded education from property taxes and negotiating public employee benefits must be addressed on many levels — few of which are controlled by the local BOS.  The Republicans know this since they accomplished none of these things.

The Republicans urge that “we must take the time to get this right.”  But the charter and the law require an annual budget to operate the town.  How long do they think it will take to renegotiate labor contracts, change the planning and zoning laws or get Hartford to equitably fund education?   

By the way, to help “fix downtown” it is clear that the Planning and Zoning regulations require significant change.  The Republicans do not support funds in the budget for this essential project. They think that the volunteer Planning and Zoning Commission, without a permanent town planner, can do this.  

Getting “town-school expenses in line with citizens’ ability to pay” is the role of the elected Board of Education (BOE).  The writers should focus more effort on the BOE members, as should we all.  Holding the town budget hostage is no solution.  Perhaps Mr. Albanesius and Mr. Fracasso should run for the Board of Education.

The Republicans talk about staffing issues without any recognition that there are binding contracts in force.  If they do not support public employee collective bargaining, they should direct their letters to Hartford and Washington.  

The Winsted Board of Selectmen is powerless in this regard. But if the Republicans are suggesting the elimination of the police department, public works or other departments with collective bargaining then they should present a plan with facts and figures to support such recommendations.

Finally the Republicans complain that they cannot propose their “plan” because they are not allowed to speak.  Anyone who watches the meetings or reads the newspaper knows that this is utter nonsense. There is no plan, just rhetoric.

We are at the point where zero increase to the budget is not enough for the Republicans. Talk about moving the goalpost!

Charlene LaVoie
Winsted

The writer is the community lawyer in Winsted.

Selectman’s response to Republicans: Why your plan won’t work

As we send the Winsted budget out for the fourth time, I would like to address the recent Republican plan and comments (“Republicans: Zero budget is not enough,” Sept. 28). The Republicans complain, whine, growl and have been generally argumentative at every budget meeting.

They have made outrageous suggestions that cannot be implemented without breaking the law. The postcards, flyers and papers, full of theory, contain no workable plans or specific dollar line items. And they waited six months to present it.

I would like to address the Republican plan and why it doesn’t work but merely sounds good.

Claim: Revaluation will increase taxes.

Fact: The revaluation does not effect this 2012-13 budget as revaluation is due December 1. Your July 1, 2012, assessment applies.

Fact: When the new assessments apply, in 2013, your taxes will depend on where you live in Town. If the budget remains at zero percent in additional spending, taxes may shift. Some will have an increase in taxes. Others will have a reduction in taxes due to the decrease in the value of your property.

Solution: Stabilize downtown neighborhoods and create a strong school system to attract families to town. This is an important solution to stabilize and balance the tax burden between all areas of town. The Democratic budget proposal contains funds for neighborhood stabilization programs.

Claim: “Let the school board come forward with a sub-MBR budget that reflects these savings, and commit to live within it, and we will support a schools budget allocation at the higher MBR. Legal niceties are respected.”

Fact: State statutes are not “niceties.”

Solution: The education budget hasn’t increased in years, while rising costs have been offset due to lower enrollment at both K-6 and Gilbert and efficiencies made with grades seven and eight moving to Gilbert. The state pays $7.8 million and the town taxes $12.1 million. We are one of the most assisted school districts in Connecticut with more than 55 percent free and reduced lunch. Special education is over 20 percent (state average 11 percent). We must rebuild the school district as well as improve the neighborhoods. School officials must continue to address special education and test scores.

Claim: Reduce Town Hall employees by eight hours a week and limit benefits to individuals only.

Fact: The labor lawyer indicates that this must be negotiated to be legal.

Fact: The selectmen, including our critics, voted for these contracts as early as April 2010.

Solution: The town manager is working on the supervisors contract with the labor lawyer to save as much money as possible. We have also directed that the three other union contracts be completed by March 15, 2013, to realize savings in the 2013-14 budget.

Claim: Restructure Town Hall to save money (translate: eliminate employees).

Fact: This has been ongoing for the past five years. The town no longer has a planner, housing inspector, three public works employees, four police officers, half a recreation director, half a wetlands officer, half a fire marshal and no social services department.

Fact: Due to seniority and vacation time issues, savings are calculated to be $3,000 to $10,000 a person each year for two years for each person we let go. The town is legally required to pay for 99 weeks of unemployment benefits. Some employees do not take health benefits and savings would be minimal in these categories. In a few cases the town has to pay employees to leave due to accumulated benefits over multiple administrations. In other words, taxpayers pay them to stay home!

Solution: The town manager needs to be aggressive in negotiating the four labor contracts. The town manager will also be directed to have a plan in place to restructure the Building and Community Development departments by Jan. 1, 2013.

Claim: Reduce funds to outside services such as the VNA, Youth Service Bureau, Mental Health, and the Chore Service.

Fact: Is this what we have come to as a community? Our heritage is community. The earliest pioneers worked to build meeting houses and businesses for the sake of community. Historically, the postal service, schools, library, hospital, roads, were built as a means of fostering community. Blacksmiths and carpenters, seamstresses and bankers and teachers were all the outcome of building community. We reached out to our neighbors, even if they were over the hill and out of sight, because we believed in our common welfare. Community is the foundation of working and living not simply in the same geographical area, but with the same social responsibility.

Please help us move this budget forward so that we all can move forward.

Candy Perez
Winsted

The writer is a current member of the Winchester Board of Selectmen.