.
Feedback

New London City Council Passes $81.8 Million City, School Budget

Deputy Mayor John Russell opposes measures

The City Council passed a for the 2011-2012 year on Tuesday evening. The expenditures, split between municipal services and the , were opposed by Deputy Mayor John Russell.

“Let’s put it this way: it was a silent, almost silent protest,” said Russell. “There’s certain things I would like to see done.”

Russell said he felt that the budget had not been as thorough this year, saying Finance Director Jim Lathrop presented PowerPoint presentations and other more in-depth discussions for the 2010-2011 budget. Russell said he also felt the budget did not bring capital expenditures up for a vote, suggesting that the city might have to bond $14-15 million for such projects, and criticized the Board of Education.

“Until there’s some accountability from that end, I wouldn’t vote to give them anything,” he said. “I’m not happy at all with the way our Board of Education is operating…All I see from them is roadblocks.”

Russell was the sole opponent among the six city councilors present. Michael Buscetto III was not at the meeting.

Councilor Adam Sprecace said capital expenditures are typically presented as a plan on what projects the city would like to complete and how much money should be spent on them. Councilor Rob Pero, who chairs the Finance Committee, said capital expenditures are one-time expenditures which should not be included in the budget itself since it will lead to an increase in the mill rate.

Pero also said the budget includes a debt service item, which amounted to $5,537,729 this year, for long-term payments including capital projects. He questioned why Russell brought up his opposition on the final vote and did not discuss his concerns before the vote was taken or at other meetings.

“He didn’t come to any of the [Finance Committee] meetings,” said Pero. “He came to one and left early.”

The Board of Education represents the largest portion of the budget with an appropriation of $39,817,405. That district, which had requested $40,471,333, earlier in May. The main changes involved in the updated budget will include the district assuming operation of the and transferring several staffers there.

The municipal budget cut most of the , including the for six new police officers and a lieutenant and the for a deputy chief. The budget does expand the municipal payroll, adding a full-time crime analyst and part-time clerical worker to the , a full-time accounting technician to the , and a part-time accountant to the .

The council voted unanimously to set the mill rate at 25.31, which retains the current mill rate, with taxes due and payable on July 1 and January 1. The council also voted unanimously to delay a vote on funding for the City Center District until the next meeting on June 6 since the items did not appear on public notices for the special meeting. The items ask if the council will approve an annual $100,000 appropriation to the City Center District for 2011-2012 and approve an appropriation ordinance for the City Center District.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from New London Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Sue P. May 20, 2013 at 11:03 am
Very good comparison. I also wanted to add that the Ct. College students that believe what FinizioRead More has to say remind me of The Children of the Corn. After speaking with a friend we realized that Mayor Finizio is like a college student. I just wish he knew that real life does not work this way. New London has already played this game with the Giordano lady years ago. Remember her she was from Ct. College and also was going to make New London a hip city. We got homeless people and brownfields. So much for that idea. Been their done that. How about a new idea for once. Please don't think about shutting down State St. that too was a bad idea. Just ask Mr. Hyslop and Ms. Glover how their ideas worked out. It doesn't matter anyways it's all about the votes and getting your Children of the Corn on the Council. I mean come on drivers licenses for illigals who ever thought that one up.
J. Scagnetti May 20, 2013 at 10:07 am
I'd say more like G.I. Joe vs cobra, oh no wait, He man vs skeletor or maybe even the thundercats vsRead More mumra! Lol
Carol Haley May 19, 2013 at 07:14 pm
Here's the latest Spencer from the AP, if we can believe them: Traffic in southwest ConnecticutRead More could be a mess for as much as a week until service is restored to the commuter rail line affected by a derailment that injured scores of passengers, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy warned Sunday.
Spencer May 19, 2013 at 07:10 pm
Another blow to not only NL's but the entire Southern CT's economy! Guess who will be picking upRead More the tab?
Carol Haley May 19, 2013 at 05:26 pm
I read that Malloy is hoping Monday but there are problems with the tracks and that has to beRead More repaired. Taking a guestimate, if it isn't Monday, maybe the end of the week.
John Martin May 19, 2013 at 02:42 pm
Of course, you are assuming that the government fund managers would be responsible. So far, this hasRead More been far from the case. The Federal government has plundered Social Security for decades, the teacher and state employee funds have been systematically looted. Of course they want to open this up to anyone with dollars in their pockets. I am not opposed to a program like this - in fact, economies of scale using voluntary contributions in a well-managed plan could be quite beneficial. If the government is going to be allowed to administer the program, there needs to be stringent safeguards, the funds must be untouchable, and there should be swift and significant consequences for mismanagement. Oh, but wait - this is Connecticut. Of course people will find their dollars funding the 'progressive' agenda with no regard for the state's fiduciary, legal, and moral obligation to the contributors.
Kathleen Mitchell May 19, 2013 at 10:45 am
If I read this correctly and, if not, I'm sure someone will correct me, the highlights of this billRead More are (1) It's designed for workers "who do not have access to a retirement plan through their employer" (2) "workers can take their investment with them as they move from job to job." (3) "whatever administrative costs are associated with the plan are charged to the participants themselves, not Connecticut taxpayers." I haven't read the bill yet but I don't see anything in this article by Richard Waselik regarding an employer contribution or match so what is the problem?
Sue P. May 19, 2013 at 10:20 am
Richard, Are you the same Richard that sent a letter to the city council when you became concernedRead More that people that did not work for the city long enough were contributing to the pension plan? I think I have a copy of it somewhere. I think you were concerned that people were getting vested and they were not suppose to be yet.
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 07:44 am
Pretty funny Spencer. But you don't want a museum there. You need something that generates taxes.Read More Museums are mostly non-profit thereby not generating any taxes. I know you were being funny. I was disgusted to read the developer couldn't show financial backing.
Kathleen Mitchell May 17, 2013 at 05:47 pm
Who would haveever thought of Wasp Spray? When you get the case of spray, be sure and drop a can offRead More at my house;>)
Jeff Brown May 17, 2013 at 03:46 pm
Good article, gonna have to pick up a case of wasp spray!
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 12:34 pm
Barbara, I agree with you. But it is probably a lot easier to get an illegal social security numberRead More than we would know. There are two ways of looking at this issue, but my resentment is that I have to pay for them.
Barbara Crocker May 17, 2013 at 07:52 am
But for state aid they would have to have a Social Security number. Bending and breaking laws isRead More how they got here in the first place. The fact that elected officials condone and encourage these laws to be broken is the biggest problem that I have with this whole debacle. "Undocumented residents" place a burden on all of us, and take jobs that could be worked by legal residents. Employers hire illegals (yes I prefer calling them what they are, to hell with being politically correct) because it saves them money, not because "no one else would work these jobs". This is a slap in the face to all of our ancestors who came to this country and followed the rules to become citizens.
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 06:51 am
The way things have been going in the eastern part of the United States, as long as the illegals areRead More not breaking the law criminally (motor vehicle is different), they are not arrested for being illegal. Its the illegal immigrants who break the law, such as the large drug bust recently in the papers. As long as they are minding their own business, they get a pass. The only problem I have with illegals is their rush to get on state aid, food stamps, etc. I don't think we should have to support those that choose to live in this country illegally. Becoming a US citizen is not cheap. It is expensive, but it is something that they must work for.
Spencer May 16, 2013 at 04:42 pm
Perhaps because people who vote continue to vote the same way they have for years--and expect to getRead More different results when they do so?