Trim NL tax hike

W hile a $1 million cut to the requested New London Board of Education budget — a reduction enacted by the Board of Finance only to be ruled invalid by the city attorney, then fully restored by the City Council — went too deep, some shared sacrifice on the part of school board is in order.

The council should work with Mayor Michael Passero to find more savings on the city side of the budget, as well.

As things stand, with the city budget approaching final approval, property owners in New London are looking at a tax rate increase of nearly 4 mills, or about 10 percent. It is too much to ask of city taxpayers and, as noted in this space previously, not in keeping with the spirit of fiscal responsibility on which Passero campaigned for mayor in 2015.

Passero has backed from the start a $1 million increase in city funding for the public schools, an effort to offset some state and federal reductions and support an improving school system while continuing the transition to an all-magnetschools district. Keeping New London schools moving in the right direction should be a priority, helping the upward mobility of its children and making the city a more attractive place for families to buy a home.

The Board of Finance, on a 2-0 vote with one abstention, cut the $1 million. City Attorney Jeffrey Londregan subsequently ruled the vote non-binding because three votes were necessary. Free of the mandate, the council restored the funding.

Cutting the increased aid in half, to $500,000, could lower the planned tax increase and place a reasonable demand on the school board and administration to find the savings without disrupting educational initiatives.

A $750,000 cut to the mayor’s proposal, approved by the finance board 3-0, stands and would require cutting three positions, according to Passero. Councilor Anthony Nolan has proposed instead a $1 million reduction in the mayor’s plan, though the mayor questions the veracity of all the proposed savings. Achieving Nolan’s bottom line, if necessary by other means, would also trim the size of the tax hike.

The point is that while some tax increase appears unavoidable, the city’s elected leaders should do all they can to limit it.