Press Release
June 15, 2007
For Immediate Release
CONTACT:
Theresa McGrath, President @
860-570-1203 or
Judy Aron, Vice President @
860-523-7257
WHTA's RESPONSE REGARDING THE BUDGET,
THE REFERENDUM, AND MISINFORMATION ALLEGATIONS
The West Hartford Taxpayers
Association exists to educate the public about tax and budget issues and to
promote prudent financial management in our town. Our organization is
entirely comprised of volunteers and membership is open to any
This year, taxpayers in town were
rightly concerned about the budget and property taxes, and the WHTA made an
effort to assist the public in understanding these issues. More people than
perhaps ever before have spent time reviewing the town and BOE budgets and
questioning why our money is being spent the way it is. We take a great
deal of satisfaction in knowing that we have done our job and that the voters who
voted on June 12, were more informed than usual about the financial issues
facing our town.
Over the course of the last few months, we have made every
effort to work with the town on these issues. While the Town Manager was
willing to spend time with us at our June monthly meeting just a few weeks ago
to answer questions, elected officials as a group refused to engage in a direct
dialogue. From the beginning of this process, they preferred to level continued
attacks against us through the press, calling us an “arm of the Republican
party,” a “springboard” etc., and the Hartford Courant has been happy to serve
as their mouthpiece. They continue these attacks. Last minute accusations about
“lying, manipulation, and misinformation” from some town leaders before an
election has also sadly become part of the voting process in this town. In this
referendum, instead of looking at the bigger picture and seeing how people are
struggling to pay their tax bill and how they can offer meaningful relief, the
politicians preferred to deflect the issues.
The Bottom Line
On Tuesday, voters had the chance to
indicate whether they support the budget or not. The people rejected it
outright. Obviously, the public is unhappy with the high property taxes in town
and concerned about tax increases, and they showed this in many ways and
formats, from the town website to the WHTA website to what they said and heard
during public hearings. The overwhelming rejection of this budget
reflected the taxpayers’ dissatisfaction with a 6.6% increase in their tax
bill, and a 3.48% increase in town spending, and proves that it was time for
spending in this town to be reexamined. This referendum was not about a
specific ad or statistic; it was about taxpayers’ dissatisfaction with a high
property tax increase on top of property taxes that are already among the
highest in the nation, relative to property value.
The Town Manager’s “2007-2008 Town
Budget Facts”
We would like to mention the memo on
“2007-2008 Town Budget Facts” that the Town Manager’s Office sent to every home
in town right before the referendum. We believe strongly that this most
certainly was the biggest reason why we had such a large percentage voter
turnout, and why 74% voted No. Voters clearly saw what they were going to be
paying this year, and they said NO. This memo, which was printed and mailed at
taxpayer expense, provided misleading information to the public. It
stated that the adopted budget “reduces” appropriations by $6 Million.
This implies a reduction in the budget, when in fact the proposed budget would
increase 3.48%. It is a “reduction” only when compared to the inflated
initial budget that even the town council rejected as too high. The memo
also emphasized that property taxes were increasing 1.94%, when in fact
homeowners are seeing a 6.6% increase. It stated that the mill rate will
continue to go down, when this is not guaranteed to happen. The memo also
showed each homeowner what their proposed new taxes would be, but did not show
how much they would be increasing over last year. Taken as a whole, this
memo itself was misleading. If town officials thought that this would
sway the vote their way, they were obviously mistaken.
Town Officials Leveled Claims at
WHTA
The Town Manager, Mayor and other officials have leveled
claims that the WHTA had purposely misled the public by disseminating incorrect
information with regard to the budget. We did no such thing and we need to
set a few things straight. All information that we reported to the public
was obtained from the proposed budget book numbers, the list of cuts that went
into the adopted budget, statements made on the record by the Town Manager,
Mayor and other elected officials, as well as information from town
employees. Many residents had trouble finding information on the town
website or getting the town to respond to their questions, and the town never
provided a way for people to calculate their taxes online as the Mayor promised
on the Dan Lovallo show on WDRC am
Talk of Connecticut radio station. No worksheets were provided to figure out
one’s phase-in figures.
We are proud to say that the WHTA did provide this service
by making a tax calculator worksheet available on our website, thanks to the
efforts of one of our members, Al Masciocchi, an
actuary by profession. Politicians who are now criticizing the WHTA did
not come to our meetings to share their numbers, even though we repeatedly
invited them. In fact, not one of our elected officials joined us in our
meetings to talk about the budget.
Contrary to belief, we did not want to go to a referendum in
the beginning. Referenda are a tremendous amount of work and are time
consuming for the public and the people organizing the effort, many of whom are
busy working every day so they can pay their taxes. We told the Town Council in
the beginning what we were looking for in this tough budget year. They
came part of the way – but obviously not enough for the citizens of our town.
The Hartford Courant Won’t Get it
Right
We find it interesting that the Courant would print
accusations from the Mayor and others that the WHTA was misinforming the
public, but WOULD NOT PRINT our rebuttal to these accusations, and allowed the
Mayor to spread his own brand of misinformation. Quite frankly we are tired of
the juvenile “he said/she said” political games being played here. We found
that the Courant would gladly print any statement or allegation made by town
officials, without doing any fact checking, but would twist and misquote
statements of our members, or simply refuse to report our side of the
story. As a result, we have had to end all communication with the
Courant, except through printed statements. In the Courant article that
appeared the day after the referendum, the reporter described how he engaged in
improper electioneering, claiming to a voter outside their voting place that
they had been misinformed by the WHTA regarding salary increases to the Town
Manager’s salary. Following the appearance of this article, it was
pointed out to the reporter’s editor that in fact the WHTA’s
claim was true. The editor admitted the error and agreed to print a
retraction. How about telling your reporter that “journalists” are not supposed
to stand outside polling places trying to sway voters with
misinformation? We do note, however, that the Courant accurately
reported the fact that we were assessed at the height of the market and are
already overpaying on the value of our homes. As the
Courant stated: “Anger over an October
revaluation that captured sky-high home values and shifted part of the tax
burden from commercial to residential properties probably was enough to prompt
voters to reject the town council's budget in Tuesday's referendum.”
(
The Mill Rate Will Not Go Down
Rather than discuss with citizens the possibility of where savings
could be obtained, and how the town could cooperate with taxpayers, the town
administration chose to be adversarial and belligerent. And if anyone purposely
misled the public it would be Mayor Slifka and his
Administration who continued to claim that the mill rate will drop to 29.17
after the 5 year phase-in of revaluation, despite Town Manager Jim Francis’
statement on the record that a 29.17 mill rate is not at all likely! We would
have thought that would have been news to the Courant, but obviously it was
not. Perhaps the 29.17 is just considered another empty promise by our elected
officials.
The Town Manager’s Salary
We would like to specifically address the issues of
increases in the Town Manager’s salary and the budget for his office. If
you look at the town budget, it shows an 18.2% increase in Wages & Salaries
under the Town Manager section of the Budget. We want to make it clear
that we had not stated in any of our Fact Sheets that the Manager’s salary had
increased in the 07/08 Budget. We stated specifically that the Town
Manager’s portion of the budget – the Wages & Salaries line item had
increased by 18.2%, and that the Town Manager’s salary ($145,000 + benefits)
had already been inflated from what the previous Town Manager’s salary ($132,000)
had been.
The budget numbers on the town website as of right now
continue to show an overall department increase of 14.8%, which had been cut
from 15.1% - without showing what line items were cut. You can look these
numbers up right now if you like at www.West-Hartford.org.
And yet, when we report these numbers, the Mayor and others accuse us of
misleading the public. How are we misleading the public by reporting the
numbers they give us? Why does the Courant allow the Mayor to deny these
facts when they are stated on the town website? We stand by this
statement.
The budget line item for Wages & Salaries under the Town
Manager section of the Budget show an increase in the 06/07 adopted $193,507 to
07/08 adopted $228,714 (that’s an 18.2% increase). Our Town Manager’s salary is
in fact included in the big increase in that line item. Overall, the
Town Manager section of the budget show expenses increased from last year by
14.8%, from the adopted 06/07 figure of $285,767 to the 07/08 adopted $328,103.
In recent days, however, we have learned a few things about
how the Town Manager’s salary was reported in previous years. Mr. Francis
informed us only days prior to the referendum vote and after he provided Dan
Jones, reporter from the Hartford Courant a line item explanation of his
interpretation of our Fat Facts, that in the past, a portion of the Town
Manager’s salary was hidden in a different part of the budget, although he
won’t tell us where. So, when the Town Manager and Mayor say that he is
not getting a huge increase over what the Town Manager was paid in the past,
what they are really saying is that in previous years they were misleading us
by hiding a part of his compensation elsewhere in the budget.
This may explain why the Mayor refused to explain his
position on this issue when questioned on this by the WTIC-AM morning show
hosts earlier this week. In order to be honest this year, they would have
to admit that they were not being honest in the past. You cannot have it
both ways Mayor Slifka.
The Co-Payment Confusion
And, on another issue that has caused some confusion, the
town cannot even get its own figures right. Two town officials quoted two
different prescription co-pays for teachers. Town Manager Jim Francis
quoted a $20 co-payment. Board of Ed chair Jack Darcy had contacted
Theresa McGrath, President of the WHTA, to state that he has a $15 co-payment, with a $5 generic drugs and a $20 name brand drugs. He
even offered to show Mrs. McGrath his insurance card. Mrs. McGrath had
not thought that it was necessary at the time. Since her conversation
with Mr. Darcy, Mrs. McGrath had found that Mr. Darcy was quoted in the West
Hartford News as saying, “…It is a $20 co-pay.”
Our information of the $3 co-payments were provided to us by a teacher who
called to support us in our efforts to cut taxes. She was worried about
her mother who could no longer pay her taxes due to the tax increases.
She explained how embarrassed she was that her benefits were far greater than
the average public, and more particularly, the elderly. She was concerned
about all those who would be in a similar situation as her mother and would not
have support from other family members. We would actually like to know
what the truth is. We will be taking a look at the contracts as a
result. Currently, we have had the opportunity to substantiate the $20
co-payments for doctor visits and $5 for generic drugs and $20 for name brand
drugs. We are currently researching all healthcare contracts for all town
employees.
Our Town’s Lack of Communication
It is difficult to report on these types of issues when the
town refuses to provide the information or provides misleading information,
since there is usually no other way to get it. Many of our members and
other people have asked for information from the town, but the town has not
responded to them. We have emails to prove this. This is a
violation of the Freedom of Information Request Laws.
The New Garbage Collection Contract
and Other Issues
We did not make up the fact that the
town is spending $700,000 more on garbage collection under the new contract. We
did not make up the fact that the Leisure Services fund has been running an almost
2 million dollar deficit, but hiding this by moving expenses into other areas
of the budget. We did not make up the fact that there are programs that should
be self-sustaining and are not. We did not make up the fact that they will be
spending $6.84 million dollars more than last year! Has anyone quantified how
much the Town Hall/Board of Education building consolidation really saved us so
far? Where is the savings? What happened to the money we saved in snow plowing
this past year? Why do we continue to hire back people who have retired and are
already receiving benefits? What happened to the $177,277 that we received from
the state in Aug 2006? You will not hear any of that from our town officials…
instead you will hear allegations of how WHTA is misleading the public!
The Miniature Golf Course
Regarding the mini-golf course, it
IS an item still in the Capital Improvement Plan (Budget Book page 173 &
187 for program year 2007-08). It has not been removed. If we don’t
address this issue now, when it is first being approved, when are we suppose to talk about it?
The Real Facts about Revaluation
With regard to revaluation, each and
every homeowner will at some point along the 5 year phase-in realize the total
increases that revaluation places on their property. That is anywhere from
10-125%. We can argue the points, but the fact is our taxes are going
up 6.6% this year with a built in assessment increase for each subsequent
year, on top of whatever increased spending will be!
The Mayor and his cohorts chose to communicate to the public
through the media to misinform them and discredit the WHTA. The public
would have appreciated it if they had worked with the WHTA, not against us, and
to properly inform them through town hall meetings where the public’s questions
could be answered directly. Instead, they chose to “inform” the public by
twisting our review of their budget.
On a More
Positive Note…
Citizens were forced to inform themselves by looking into
what our town is spending. They are demanding the town administration answer to
the items which look questionable in both the municipal budget and the BOE
budget. It’s called open government. Our elected officials should welcome it
instead of scorning it. Would discussions regarding line item expenditures have
happened if it weren’t for the WHTA? We seriously doubt it. Would the BOE have
even asked the unions to consider renegotiating to help the town, even though
it was too late by that point and was an empty gesture to appease the
taxpayers? We very seriously doubt it.
Important Truths West Hartford needs
to Face
The fact is that spending is
increasing more than cost of living increases and inflation. MDC
increases will hit us like a tsunami. We will continue to struggle to get the
education funding from the state that is due us. Binding arbitration has choked
our ability to control salaries and wages of our employees and nothing is being
done to change that.
The truth is that many
Who Voted No?
Families with school children voted
NO. Educators voted NO. We were even told that State Senator Jonathan
Harris told members of the Farmington Chamber of Commerce that he voted
NO. We have asked him to clarify this. People from all incomes and party
affiliations voted NO. A strong majority of people in
every polling place voted NO.
Why Did They Vote No?
We believe that this was not because
of any particular statement made by WHTA, but because the fact remains we are
paying too much in taxes and people won’t stand for large increases when they
think the town does not need to spend so much of our money. It is a fact that
is deterring people from moving into our town, and it is forcing long time
residents to leave.
The bottom line is that the numbers we reported were based
on the information we were provided. No one made up numbers for malicious
intent. Some people seem to be hung up on details, when the bottom line is that
taxes are high, spending is going up, and the taxpayers have had enough. There
are areas of spending which should and can be reduced, and the taxpayers demand
that. We now need to roll up our sleeves, make appropriate reductions, push for
changes at the state level if necessary, and stop the finger pointing.
Our members are willing to provide what help they can to the town. We all
want to be a part of the solution.
The West Hartford Taxpayers Association is non-partisan association dedicated to
the proposition that Town Government can be operated efficiently to provide needed
services at a fair cost to the Citizens of West Hartford. It has been in existence since 1933.
For additional information:
Visit the West Hartford Taxpayers Association’s web site at www.WHTA.org
Theresa McGrath, President president@whta.org or 860-570-1203
Judy Aron, Vice President vpresident@whta.org or 860-523-7257