YourCT.com header image 2

Guest View: Norwalk’s budget process off to a good start


by turfgrrl


February 21st, 2008 · 16 Comments

This is part of an ongoing series of guest posts about issues in Norwalk. yourCT.com is a non-partisan site dedicated to airing all sides of a issue. That can’t happen without valuable contributions from our readers.

by Fred Wilms

This year we are starting the city budget process at a very good point. Many may recall that last year there was a great deal of controversy over the budget, especially in relation to the Board of Education. This year I believe we can avoid extreme controversy while keeping our taxes low and, at the same time, ensuring that new crime and public safety initiatives get funded.
This year our starting point on taxes is an average increase of 3.7 percent. To put this into perspective, we are starting lower than the 4.1 percent inflation rate. We are also starting at the same point where we finished the past two years: In 2006 the average tax increase was 3.6 percent, while last year it was 3.9 percent.

Why are we off to such a good start? There are two big reasons. The first is the school board is finally requesting a more fiscally responsible budget. Their 4.9 percent increase falls within the 4-5 percent spending range over the past 10 years. This goes to show that the best way the school board can reduce budget controversies is by being more fiscally responsible.

The second favorable reason is we are finally done phasing in the past revaluation. So this year there is no further tax burden shift from commercial owners to residential homeowners. This goes to show that a growing commercial tax base (such as our future 95/7, West Avenue and Wall Street redevelopment projects), could take the pressure off our residential taxpayers.

On the spending side, the proposed budget focuses on the protection of life and property. The mayor is recommending funding for three additional police officers, two new firefighters and a zoning compliance officer. With increasing concerns about crime and public safety, the new police and fire positions make a lot of sense. The new zoning compliance position will improve our quality of life by reducing the backlog of zoning violations.

Unfortunately, there are storm clouds on the horizon. The economic recession, the housing market downturn and defaults on subprime mortgages could all spill over to us at the municipal level. Fewer home sales mean less conveyance tax revenue. More homeowners going into default means less property taxes being collected. Lower interest rates mean reduced investment income. All of these trends could force property taxes to go up.
So we will not rest on our laurels. We know we have our work cut out for us. Over the next two months, the BET will go line by line through every city department. We will look for further savings and for more effective ways of doing things. Leadership starts at the top, and Mayor Moccia is leading the way by voluntarily defunding a position within his own office.

We will also continue to scrutinize the Board of Education budget closely. We have already reviewed every single page of their budget and have already submitted a list of 40 questions. Many of our questions focus on savings outside of the classroom. We have reviewed the Cambridge Report and share the concerns of many about Norwalk failing under No Child Left Behind. While there have been improvements since the last election, there are still concerns about the school board exercising proper oversight over Central Office and the transparency of the entire school budget process.

I look forward to working once again with my six dedicated colleagues on the BET. We also look forward to working with the Common Council, especially in their formation of a responsible appropriations cap. Together we can craft a budget that protects the taxpayers, while at the same time providing adequate funding to needed city initiatives.

Fred Wilms is chairman of the Norwalk Board of Estimate and Taxation

Tags: Norwalk

16 Responses so far “Guest View: Norwalk’s budget process off to a good start”



  • 1 Anonymous Too // Feb 22, 2008 at 9:55 am

    I forget the exact figure as to what it costs the city to educate a student whose parent(s) lie about where they live (usually Bridgeport) in order to have them come to Norwalk Schools. They usually have a friend or relative lie and let them use their address. Corda & Co. say there are about 6 in the system - that’s more like 6 per school, and even THAT’s being a little generous. The process for getting these kids kicked out is time-consuming and troublesome, so many of the principals just don’t bother. If there were a more efficient means of getting these kids back to the Bridgeport schools - AND collecting the money from the City of Bridgeport for the time we spent educating their kids (including allowing teachers and school staff members to overstep their principals and report these situations and follow up on them - and if it were made public) - it might help the city budget situation a lot. From a non-budget point of view, it would also improve morale in the schools - AND test scores.

  • 2 anonymous // Feb 22, 2008 at 8:46 pm

    Here is valuable contribution from a reader. yourCT.com is a totally REPUBLICAN partisan blog dedicated to promote Republican views on every issue.

    Don’t Be fooled by Fred Wilms’ comments. When someone disagrees with almost anyhting said, the writer is either attaked or comments deleted.

  • 3 Anonymous // Feb 22, 2008 at 10:03 pm

    I have never had anything removed or deleted never have I been accused of being a republican or a democrat .My non political rants simply piss some people off no matter what party your from.

    Tonight in our quiet neighborhood in South Norwalk according to an officer some poor bastard was held up at gunpoint on Burritt ave and Day st. Around 7 or so we saw all the cruisers and thought something was going on we don’t usually see so many cruisers on patrol.We usually don’t see any.

    Mayor Richard A. Moccia said at the meeting the investigation was “primarily in response to concerns we had at Washington Village.”

    Washington Village is a public housing project between Water and Day streets in South Norwalk.

    “We have been working, we continue to work to clean our streets, and we are,” said Moccia.
    put down the 7+7 celebration is over crime has continued at your Washington village once more.

    This was last august so it took how long to see what kind of result?

    City and police officials yesterday promised added police action at the Washington Village public housing complex after a weekend shooting at nearby Ryan Park, when a bullet pierced a young girl’s bedroom window.

    Imagine what the other housing complexes think where they have lost lives and seem little has changed the crime and safety of the complexes?

    I do attack comments when they are so absurd or so very out of touch with whats going on in the streets.Find me a republican who can do the job and I’ll back them same goes for a democrat.

    where this is a budget thread why not break down where we sit with this years budget for the police dept where we are only months away from its end and told months ago it was almsost exhausted where is it now?

    December 10th, 2007 · 43 Comments
    Chief Rilling announced that the police department has used about 65 percent of its overtime budget and we are not at the fiscal year midpoint. Of course, it might be helpful to know if the overtime was the result of one-time events, a trend or how it compares to same period in previous years. This type of basic analysis is something that it seems would be important in the sixth largest city in Connecticut, but strangely always seems to be missing form budget presentations

    On the spending side, the proposed budget focuses on the protection of life and property. The mayor is recommending funding for three additional police officers, two new firefighters and a zoning compliance officer. With increasing concerns about crime and public safety, the new police and fire positions make a lot of sense.

    Fred can you share some numbers with us you must have them you are in a position to give them to us correct?

  • 4 turfgrrl // Feb 23, 2008 at 11:01 am

    anonymous 2: The only comments that I have ever deleted have been those that have veered into personal attacks. I also announce why I have deleted them.

    Second, anyone can post a guest view. Anyone can post a comment. There are many views evident on this blog, some more contentious than others.

    The blog is what we all make it. So feel free to add “Democratic” views if you think they are so under represented.

  • 5 Anne Sullivan // Feb 23, 2008 at 1:18 pm

    Mr. Wilms, Thank you for reading the Cambridge report and noticing there are concerns that need to be addressed.

  • 6 Vet Park Junkie // Feb 24, 2008 at 8:15 am

    Great post, Fred.

    Thanks for your work and your focus on so many critical issues.

  • 7 Equal Opportunity Cynic // Feb 24, 2008 at 10:51 am

    I don’t particularly find that this is a Republican friendly site. I don’t care, ’cause I’m not Republican friendly myself, but I don’t find it that way.

  • 8 Equal Opportunity Cynic // Feb 24, 2008 at 11:01 am

    With regard to the Cambridge Report - don’t we all figure that the people down at the Central Office were all on their “best behavior” during that time and saying what they thought the Cambridge evaluators wanted to hear, as opposed to reality? Corda probably didn’t have a single golf game the whole time they were there, Lang probably bailed on the workshop she teaches elsewhere on Norwalk taxpayers’ time, Opdahl pretended to know what he was doing, and Bruce Morris probably actually stayed in his office doing what he’s paid to do (regardless of the lack of educational qualifications) rather than being up in Hartford on taxpayers’ time.

  • 9 Equal Opportunity Cynic // Feb 24, 2008 at 11:04 am

    Whatever happened to the old Norwalk Taxpayer’s League? If it’s still out there, I’m ready to join. I was a die-hard liberal back in those days but I’ve seen too much too close up to stay that way. If enough people just refused to pay their taxes until some of these blatant inequities were resolved - waste in the Bd. of Ed, refusing to deal with the huge influx of Bridgeport kids sneaking into Norwalk schools - something might get done. Of course, they’d probably find the resources to chase all of us where they don’t seem to find the resources to deal with those other issues.

  • 10 Equal Opportunity Cynic // Feb 24, 2008 at 11:25 am

    Oh, I forgot to mention paying Tom Cummings pension. How many pedophiles get THAT privilege?

  • 11 Anon // Feb 24, 2008 at 12:39 pm

    Any pedophile who has worked and contributed to their pension. It is law. You can’t take away a pension someone has earned over a lifetime just because they were arrested for something. Social Security is the same way.

  • 12 a taxpayer // Feb 25, 2008 at 9:24 am

    According to todays paper “Illegal students still a concern for Norwalks operating budget ” Sal corda gave a flimsy answer last year that stated there were about 6 illegal students in Norwalk Schools. Now he is saying there is an investigation into 44 cases of illegal students when realistically there are between 150 to 200 illegal students consuming our kids budget. Corda then goes on to say “Ousting an illegal student does not translate to savings of $11,000, the average annual cost of educating a pupil”. Maybe II am missing something here, if it costs $11,000 to educate our kids, why doesn’t it translate that illegal students also cost $11,000? Is this new math or what? Perhaps those of us who so choose will go to the bus hub, Westport Ave, East Norwalk Train, South Norwalk train and the side roads adjacent to the schools with notebook in hand and give Mr. Corda a complete accounting of who does and who does not belong in our schools. Then perhaps Mr. Corda can send a bill to the parents of these students for the amount of $11,000 to cover their education just like other towns do if you are lucky enough to get on a waiting list to pay.

  • 13 Anonymous // Feb 25, 2008 at 9:52 am

    Why should the taxpayers have to take notebook in hand? Thats why the BOE admin is so overpaid, so they can get off their butts and do their damn jobs! We’ve all see the kids getting off the Milford bus in the morning and anyone who works in Norwalk and takes the train in from Bridgeport knows these kids don’t belong getting off in Norwalk to go to school. So why is it that Sal Corda hasn’t figured this out yet? Maybe Lenny Mecca could go stand on Westport Avenue and greet the students getting off the bus instead standing around the school parking lot like he works at an elementary school or something.

  • 14 another taxpayer // Feb 25, 2008 at 11:30 am

    I think the point being made in #12 is how is it that everyone else knows the estimated numbers of illegal students when the Superintendant doesn’t!

  • 15 turfgrrl // Feb 25, 2008 at 12:37 pm

    taxpayer: On the surface Corda’s explanation of how you don’t get an $11k cost savings by reducing a single student is reasonable. It speaks to fixed costs, versus per student costs. For example, the operation of a building, the staffing of a classroom are fixed whether the class has 5 students or 25.

    So, he’s right to explain that the impact of a single student is not that great financially. In the aggregate though, a % of the student population does in fact contribute to overall per pupil costs, which I have not seen broken out, but will assume that text books, instruction materials and technology/operational support fall. This is another case that someone with a finance background could have addressed better, so there’s not this misperception of what per pupil fungible costs are.

    Despite the financial implications, there’s the other aspect of this issue where teachers are apparently concerned about obvious situation that may not being investigated.

  • 16 Anonymous // Feb 25, 2008 at 1:03 pm

    Turf, I think a major concern besides the financial is the fact that students from out of town are also factoring in to the test score equation and the behavioral situation that many times arrises from having students who live in another community and there is no parental contact during the school day. I have heard that many of these students are outright rude and bothersome as well as disruptive in the classrooms. How do we expect our own students to function properly with the disturbance of those who don’t even belong in our schools. There are many things that need to be factored in to the problems created by illegal students. Its not always the money but can include the need for teachers to be able to teach without disruptions. I think the main question here is why is it so hard for the administration to account for out of town kids when the teachers and our kids already know who they are? Is it rocket science or part of the job description of a superintendant?

Leave a Reply