By VANESSA DE LA TORRE
Courant Staff Writer
June 17, 2008
Voters today will decide on the town's
$215.9 million budget in a referendum that has pitted the local taxpayers
association against a pro-budget group that advocates maintaining the
"quality of life" in
Regular polling places will be open from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. At least 15 percent
of town voters need to participate in the referendum or the budget for 2008-09
will be automatically approved, Town Clerk Essie Labrot
said Monday. If the budget is defeated, then the town council will need to
adopt a revised plan by June 30.
Those unhappy with the new budget could then petition for a second referendum
that would be held Sept. 30, Labrot said. The town
charter allows a maximum of two referendums per annual budget.
The 2008-09 municipal budget reflects a 6.9 percent
spending increase and includes $124.9 million in school funding. With a
property tax rate of 37.64 mills, a decrease of 0.99 mills from the current
rate, the average homeowner with a $354,000 market value house after the 2006
phased-in revaluation would have to pay an extra $42.95 in property taxes a
month. A mill represents $1 of property tax for every $1,000 of assessed value.
The council adopted the budget April 22 by a 6-3 vote that fell along party
lines. Democrats, while acknowledging the burden on taxpayers, described the
spending plan as a necessary maintenance budget that would preserve town
schools and public safety. The Republican minority argued that some residents
will no longer be able to afford to live in town because of high property tax
bills.
The West Hartford Taxpayers Association submitted a petition in May with more
than the 2,264 signatures needed to force a referendum and has called on the
council to slash the budget's spending increase in half.
West Hartford FIRST, a grass-roots group that is defending the budget, has
argued in fliers posted around town that "a $1 million cut in the budget
would translate into just $3.38 in monthly tax savings on a median-value home.
Making cuts large enough to have a meaningful impact on the tax increase would
severely affect all aspects of our quality of life."