As Fairfield Budget Vote Nears, Residents Have Their Say

FAIRFIELD, CT — Some residents questioned conservation and education cuts at a recent public forum on Fairfield’s proposed budget, while others felt expenses were too high, given the coronavirus pandemic.

“People in Fairfield are still hurting,” said Craig Curley, who called the budget “tone-deaf” as well as “audacious and disrespectful.”

The $335.5 million spending plan includes an $18.3 million — or 5.8 percent — uptick in year-over-year expenses, a 1.9 percent mill rate increase and a 6.4 percent growth in the assessed tax levy. The budget comes a year after Fairfield officials chose not to raise the tax rate in order to offer residents a financial reprieve during the hardship of the pandemic.

The proposed 2022 budget was approved earlier in the month by a divided Board of Selectmen and will be the subject of a vote Wednesday by the Board of Finance, which oversaw Saturday’s forum.

“I would hope that before you vote on this budget you get a straight answer for the people of Fairfield what they should expect on average their tax increase to be,” said Representative Town Meeting member Bill Gerber, D-District 2, who noted recent property appraisals would affect tax totals.

Other residents targeted specific sections of the spending plan. A hot topic during the budget season has been First Selectwoman Brenda Kupchick’s decision to eliminate a $123,000 conservation administrator job and terminate Annette Jacobson, who held the position.

“It’s an essential need for the town,” said conservation advocate Mary Hogue, noting much of Fairfield’s tax base is in a flood zone and that the conservation department supports five town bodies.

Prior to Jacobson’s termination, former conservation director Brian Carey resigned after he was charged in the town’s fill pile scandal. A consulting firm and attorney are currently overseeing the department’s day-to-day operations.

“As a coastal community it is our duty to have a strong conservation department,” said Kasandra Marshall, an alternate on the Land Acquisition Commission.

Marshall helped start an online petition to restore the administrator position. It has received more than 1,000 signatures.

“We’re a large town with open spaces that we treasure competing with developers and others who would trample on the environment,” said Jennifer Maxon-Kennelly, a school board member who attended the hearing to discuss education spending but also weighed in on conservation staffing.

Several Board of Education members and other school community leaders were at the Webex forum to ask the town to fully fund the school board’s requested budget.

The Board of Education sought a $9.5 million year-over-year hike, but Kupchick’s budget only allowed for a $7.5 million increase. If passed, the $2 million reduction is likely to result in a $1.5 million cut rather than the full $2 million, as the school district is expected to see $500,000 in healthcare savings.

Those in favor of a fully funded education budget worried students and staff would be affected by the reduction.

“We’re only beginning to understand the impact the past year has had,” said school board member Carol Guernsey, citing concerns about instruction and social-emotional health.

More than $2.5 million of the increase the Board of Education has requested is dedicated to filling a financial hole created when the district used excess funds generated in early 2020 by the onset of the pandemic to pay for maintenance and transportation in 2021.

“Now is the time that our schools need our community’s full support and funding,” Fairfield parent Katie Flynn said. “I implore the Board of Finance to restore the funds reduced by the Board of Selectmen.”

After the public had their say, members of the Board of Finance responded, with many noting that the decision not to raise the tax rate last year created millions of dollars in financial cliffs for the town, which Chief Finance Officer Jared Schmitt estimated at between $7.9 million and $10 million.

“We knew coming into this budget year that we had created all these cliffs,” member James Walsh said. “We had created cliffs, things we didn’t fund that we normally fund, things that we would never ever do other than a pandemic.”

Walsh and other board members were optimistic the body could still lower the mill rate.

“I do think a 6 percent spending increase is way too much, especially during a revaluation year,” member John Mitola said. “I think we’re going to be able to do some things to fill some of these cliffs that we created from last year’s budget and not have such a large tax increase.”

Mitola warned that not everyone’s wishes for the budget were guaranteed to be granted.

“This board doesn’t have the authority to reinstate a position,” he said, adding even if the Board of Finance restored the funding for a job eliminated by Kupchick, she would have no obligation to bring back the position.

After the Board of Finance vote Wednesday, the budget will go before the Representative Town Meeting for approval in May.