EAST HAMPTON — Town officials were pleased to see the $53.9 million 2023-24 budget passed by voters Tuesday, after several months of controversy and an initial failed referendum that saw many resident pushing for more spending.
Many voters who rejected the initial spending plan cited cuts to education included in the plan. Voters' approval Tuesday avoids any cuts in education staff. The $35,858,655 Board of Education budget was approved by a vote of 1,043-678, while the $17,995,316 town government budget was approved by a vote of 945-777.
“The community has shown that they care about supporting education,” Board of Education Chairwoman Christina Tammaro Dzagan said Wednesday.
Original proposals sought $36.4 million to be allocated to the schools, $2.1 million more than in 2022-23, a rise of 6.21 percent; and for $18.5 million in government funding, an increase of about $1 million, or 5.75 percent over the last fiscal year.
But on April 5, the finance board proposed $35.6 million for the schools, cutting Superintendent Paul K. Smith's request by some $792,000, Town Manager David Cox said Wednesday.
So, finance officials restored $250,000 after the schools chief made cuts, he added, primarily in health insurance costs.
Town Manager David Cox characterized Tuesday’s voter turnout as “extraordinary.”
“That’s more along the lines of what’s ‘normal’ for a town budget these days for the May referendum,” he said.
“It was a little bit nerve-wracking during the day as I’m looking at relatively low numbers of people coming out,” Cox said. “I wasn’t sure quite what was going to happen. But, ultimately, in the end, 1,700 people shared their opinion and got it done.”
Since 2017-18, East Hampton has bifurcated its budget into Board of Education and general government spending, Finance Director Jeff Jylkka said Tuesday afternoon. The schools allocation comprises more than 33 percent of the overall budget.
Over the course of budget season, multitudes, including students, advocated for more funding by speaking out at public meetings, carrying signs outside Town Hall during the referendums, and other efforts.
They urged town leaders to send the proposal back to finance board members to consider a restoration of earlier funding.
Others who didn’t want an increase in school funds turned out to make their arguments on either side, Jylkka said.
Those who opposed cuts to the schools in the initial spending package used the slogan “Vote No, Too Low.”
Those concerned about staff cuts included adults and students, who turned out with posters reading "protect our schools," "budget cuts hurt kids" and simply "vote no."
“They felt if the budget got voted down, and more people thought it was a no vote because it was too low, funds would be restored,” Jylkka said.
Two separate referendum questions were meant to gauge public opinion on why voters cast their ballots either way.
Of 1,361 voters who responded to a query about the cost of the town government budget, 675 said it was too high, and 686 felt it was too low — a nearly even split.
Of 1,411 people who responded to a similar question about the Board of Education, 667 still felt it was too low, but the remainder — 744 — thought it was too high.
The proposed tax rate was 37 mills, a rise of 2.4 mills. The Finance Board is expected to set the final tax rate at its July 17 meeting.
The Board of Finance already set the motor vehicle tax rate at 32.46 mills.
At the May 30 referendum, both budgets were rejected by large margins: general government, 2,015 to 904; and on the school side, 2,296 to 617.
Cox and others are working on a way for residents to better engage in local government.
“One of the things we’ve been talking about, and I’ve tried to commit to is in the future, is finding a way to provide opportunities for members of the community to participate earlier in the process and at more appropriate times,” he said.
It’s especially interesting to see many residents getting involved in the process, Cox said.
“In any economy, it’s a shock when your community generally comes out and says the cost of our government isn’t high enough. Fundamentally, that is a surprising activity any time you hear it on such a broad scale,” he added.
“This time, lots of people became engaged,” he said, with hundreds of people coming to council and finance and school board meetings, commenting and being active.
“That’s not been the norm,” Cox said, pointing to relatively low numbers of people coming to regular meetings. “It’s a challenge for government all over: How do we get people involved and at the right times?”
East Hampton is a very engaged community when it comes to voting on budgets, Jylkka said. “You have people who are clearly passionate about education and you have folks who are passionate about the other services," such as parks and rec, police and public safety.
It’s not that uncommon in East Hampton for the proposed budget to go to voters multiple times. In fact, it took four referendums for residents to approve town government funding for the 2018-19 fiscal year, Jylkka said.
Most Connecticut municipalities have already approved their 2023-24 spending plans. Because East Hampton hadn’t done so by the end of the fiscal year, June 30, council members authorized $3.1 million in spending as a stopgap measure for July, setting a temporary tax rate of 34.66.
The average impact of the budget on taxpayers is laid out in budget estimates prior to the vote.
Property owners whose homes are assessed at $100,000 will now pay $3,606 a year, a monthly increase of $12; while those valued at $500,000 are billed $18,030 annually, a rise by $58 a month.
It’s important for people to communicate their needs and wants during budget season, the town manager added. “Any involvement is good involvement,” the town manager said.
To view the budget package, visit easthamptonct.gov.