Democratic Town Committee of New Canaan, CT

My first instinct is to say “‘Nuff said?”  But we can never say it enough:

Skip to 5:09 for the list.

About this series: Each month, three New Canaan Democrats write essays on a common topic.  You can search for “3NCD” to find them all.  We present these to advance the public debate on important issues and to present a range of opinion within the Democratic party in town.

Essay One:
I tend to be pragmatic with my voting. And that’s why I think Republicans have to be feeling doomed. They have no choice but to waste their primary vote, sending someone in to a general election with some serious handicap. Of them, Mitt Romney probably has the fewest liabilities, but going into April trailing Obama 31 points among women under 50 is not good. More on Mitt later. Since I’m pretending to be a New Canaan Republican here’s why I would disqualify the others and end up picking Mitt if I had to pick my poison on April 24th.

Ron Paul: Setting aside the fact that he is often at odds with the vast majority of Republican voters on a host of major issues, a Paul candidacy makes an Obama victory as close to certain as you can get. I’m pretty sure Idaho and Oklahoma are in play in a Paul-Obama matchup. On the up side, I would love to know who Ron Paul might select as a running mate. Who does Ron Paul consider fit to be President in his stead? (hint: his son is from a different state, and therefore eligible!) But an entertaining veepstakes is not substitute for a shot at winning. So I couldn’t see myself as a warrior in the Ron Paul revolution. (I also sincerely hope his legions do not get this post in their Google alerts, because that’s just inviting ANGRY COMMENTS IN ALL CAPS, which frankly just proves the point).

Newt Gingrich: Please. The wanna-be philosopher king is reviled among the very GOP establishment he’d need working for him. I don’t think any of the Republican candidates would kill voter enthusiasm more effectively. There ought to be a rule: if you were forced out of power by subordinates in your own party, you can’t expect them to help you get elected President. Could I cast a vote for Newt simply on the basis of his arguments? No. As far as I can tell, all are rooted in a belief that Mr. Obama’s presidency is an existential threat to liberty, etc. I’d like to think very few New Canaan Republicans think Obama is actually evil. They may disapprove of paying taxes to subsidize health care for poor people or think that EPA regulations do more harm than good. But with one or two notable exceptions, I think New Canaan Republicans are the last vestige of an old breed of Republicanism that has been driven out of the party by the likes of…

Rick Santorum: Aren’t you kind of amazed Rick Santorum is still in this thing? Such is political life in the brave new world of Citizens United. In any previous year, Rick would have folded his olde-timey revival tent long ago and headed back to Pennsylvania the DC suburbs of Virginia. But he’s on the ballot, so I’d have the choice. I couldn’t vote for Santorum if I were the New Canaan Republican I’m pretending to be. Mainly because I’m pretending to be a New Canaan Republican who had sex before marriage and wouldn’t care to begrudge anyone the normal life experiences of modernity.

So that leaves Mitt Romney, the last candidate standing. If Mitt weren’t such a flawed candidate, I think many New Canaan-esque Republicans would enthusiastically back him. I suspect that at his core, Romney is cut from the same ideological cloth as the old guard of the New England GOP. That’s why my pretend Republican persona could, and would, vote for him. But he’s been so terrified to reveal his core, knowing full well that old guard New England Republicans control precious few delegates to the convention, that he enters the general badly damaged.

And that’s where the pragmatic in me would have a problem voting for Mitt Romney. No one with favorability numbers in the 30′s can win an election. Then again, November is a long way away. I suppose there’s a chance the typical voter will warm up to him. And I suppose there’s a chance the sun will rise in the west. Never has before, but hey… you never know!

Actually, I do know. The Republican I’m pretending to be knows that the DNC and Team Obama hasn’t really spent much yet. And I can see every indicator pointing to better and better prospects for the President’s re-election. And I can see Mitt making so many unforced errors that I’m left wishing there was another choice. So if I’m a pragmatic Republican voter in New Canaan, what choice do I really have to beat Obama?

None of the above.

Essay Two:
So – it’s almost Republican Primary Time and I bet New Canaan’s GOP is getting pretty excited. Imagine you are a New Canaan Republican, a pretty successful, reasonably well educated, northeasterner. An inheritor of the proud traditions of Eisenhower, and Rockefeller and Regan, from a town that routinely sent Chris Shays to Washington and until just recently Mr. Hetherington to the State Capitol. Public servants who could actually get stuff done, knew how to govern, and even – gasp – were willing to work with Democrats for the good of their country, state, and district. If that’s you then you have just got to be thrilled with your upcoming primary choices.
Gee, who to support? Everyone’s favorite (but a little crazy) uncle, Ron Paul? Not a bad choice if you think the FED is way overrated, that the Atlantic and Pacific oceans are really all the foreign policy we need and besides what’s up with all this stuff about the FDA, etc? Who needs’em I say. What are we a bunch of sissies?

OK so maybe Uncle Ron’s not going to play too well around here. How about the great unifier Newt? I mean $2.00 gas imported from Mars sounds like a pretty good deal to me and he already knows how a lot of Washington works from his time as Speaker (until those ethics issues kind of got in the way) and heck he’s got that whole housing crisis thing pretty well sorted out from his contacts (and contracts) at Freddie Mac. Plus he already knows how to shut down government so that’s probably a good thing don’t you think? Only drawback is that he keeps losing to everybody except Uncle Paul and he really doesn’t have any money except for that guy who keeps giving him checks for $10 mil.

Hey, how about Senator  Santorum? Clearly a guy ready for the biggest job in the world. He’s a little weak on the economy, national defense, and foreign policy, and a little fuzzy on that whole separation of church and state thingy, but he’s strong for the NRA, the government’s obligation to choose most pro-creation issues for women (provided it isn’t part of any Romney-Obama care commie mandate) and besides HE’S THE ONLY REAL CONSERVATIVE IN THE RACE! (I know because he keeps saying it.) Besides, he look’s a little bit like Mr. Rogers from Sesame St. with that whole sweater vest shtick – a Mr. Rogers having a really bad attack of dyspepsia that is (editor’s note: Fred Rogers was not on Sesame Street; he had his own show.  And he could testify before the Senate quite effectively) . One problem – he’s losing only slightly less often than good old Newt and has even less of an organization. So maybe that could be a problem – plus, this guy never seems to be having any fun! Who wants a sour-puss in the White House?

And finally (drum roll and trumpets please) we have Governor Romney – whose main claim to the nomination of the party of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Eisenhower, appears to be that he ain’t any of those other guys! Of course there are those who say he isn’t really ANY guy – given that he could be a great spokesman for a certain brand of well known shower shoes (c’mon you know – flip-flops.) But, he definitely has the organization, the money and the passion. More critically, so far, he has the votes. Looks like he’s the guy – at least here in New Canaan. He might have a few problems come general election time – I mean pet owners / people who don’t like to get fired / the whole non-Caddy, non-NASCAR, non-NBA-owning demographic will be a tough sell for him. But that nifty new “etch-a-sketch” strategy just might pull it out.

So far, Democrats have been looking at the Republican Presidential Primary contests as “the gifts that just keep on giving” but gosh – you’ve got to feel a little sorry for your Republican friends. And I haven’t even mentioned Linda McMahon!

Essay Three:
As a Democrat is it is tempting to take refuge in the quote most often credited to Napoleon Bonaparte “when your enemy is destroying himself, never interfere”. So while it feels good to see the Republican Party founder on the rocks of division, I would suggest that a splintered and weakened adversary is not a good thing.

The truth of course, is that the Republican Party is not our adversary. For better or worse, we are partners in the in the years ahead as the American voter, more often than not, are likely to split their executive / legislative vote. If we win the White House, chances are we will not win Congress. In negotiations, it is far worse to deal with a splinted and distracted adversary than a coherent partner.

For example:
I have been watching the Supreme Court prepare for the 3 day hearing on President Obama’s health care overhaul, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Lack of support across the aisle, and even within the Democratic Party, has led to wasteful and divisive delay. There will be no good of these hearings. Even if the court endorses the structure as legislated we will have foot dragging, belly aching and endless search for exemption status. If you have to go to court, you have already lost.

I am not sure that there was any possibility of avoiding an adversarial approach with the Republican Party but consensual rapprochement -a re-establishment of cordial relations- is infinitely more productive. You cannot build relations with a non-entity. As a country and as a Party we are better off to have a Republican Party that is equally focused on decisions by action rather than inaction; the good of the country rather than the good of the Party, and voters first, personal egos last. It would be better for President Obama to work his consensus magic with a partner that speaks with a single –albeit weakened- voice.

“A genuine leader is not a searcher for consensus but a molder of consensus”
Martin Luther King Jr, November 1967, National Labor Leadership Assembly for Peace

The President’s signature on the Affordable Care Act, signed two years ago today:

What has it done? Find out:

Remember when a handful of folks in Greenwich were getting the vapors over Gov. Malloy’s proposal to help close the massive budget deficit he inherited by adopting a 3% surtax on the sale of motor vehicles in excess of $50,000? No? Well, I do. Among them, state senator L. Scott Frantz had the audacity to pretend his opposition had something to do with job preservation.

The Governor had scheduled an unprecedented series of town halls all over the state to hear public reaction to his set of proposals to close the budget deficit left behind after years of political malpractice and budgetary parlor tricks. When he came to Greenwich, he heard complaints that Maseratis might have to cost more. Specifically, the sale of a car up to $50k in value would be taxed like any other purchase, at 6.35 percent. The excess of that (the portion from $50,001 and up) would be subject to a 3% surtax. The people who griped suggested that this would have a detrimental effect on both jobs (?) and revenues.

Well, that was last April. Last month, we got this headline:

Greenwich Adds $50 million in Autos to Grand List

Now, it’s entirely possible that every single one of the new cars were bought out of state. Perhaps the dealerships along Putnam Ave have seen a huge decline in business and have had to lay people off. Or perhaps L. Scott Frantz and the other “sky will fall if we actually balance the budget by making me pay 3% more for some of my Porsche” folks were full of it and making the same tired, vacuous, data-free arguments they’ve been making since 1980.

I’m pretty sure many of those cars were sold in state, and that’s a good thing.  For starters, even if we ignore the 3% surtax for the state, the existence of $50 million of “extra” auto value means higher property tax revenues for the Town of Greenwich. My quick calculation: Greenwich picks up about $265,000 in local taxes, assuming no change in the mill rate.  Plus, as part of the change in the sales tax rate, municipalities now get a small portion of the sales tax generated in their towns.  In the Courant article, it was reported that one dealership in Greenwich — one of many along Putnam Ave. — does $167 million in annual sales.  Let’s assume their sales were flat this year, even though an extra $50 million worth of autos showed up in Greenwich residents’ garages.  The town gets 0.1% of the sales made in Greenwich.  That adds up to another $167,000 just from that one dealership. Add a few cops or teachers to the payroll, and the sales from the Rolls-Royce joint cover the tab. Or don’t and keep other rates low.  In the past, Greenwich never saw that money.

So, did people buy their cars out-of-state?  Let’s see if it makes sense to pop over to Westchester to pick up that new luxury car:

And what is the sales tax in New York?  Well, it depends on the county.  If you search for, say, “Maserati Dealers in Westchester County” you see that your options are Greenwich, Spring Valley (Rockland), Plainview (Long Island) or Manhattan.  The tax rates: Rockland = 8.375%, Nassau = 8.625%, and Manhattan = 8.875%.  So if your new car is around $150,000, you break even compared to Rockland County and still save a few bucks in Greenwich if you come up from Manhattan.    To get to Manhattan’s tax rate, you’d need to spend $316,000 on your new ride.  If you can, and go miles out of your way to break even, aren’t you a fool?

Unless there are a lot of fools buying high-end cars, the state of Connecticut collected extra revenue. The Connecticut towns where these cars were sold got a few bucks for the local coffers, too. Did sales decline?  That I can’t answer.  I would love to know.  Did the dealer quoted in the Courant article reduce his work force?  I suspect his sales have a lot more to do with the nature of bonuses in a given year than with a surtax that brings the effective rate to parity with his nearest competitors.  But who knows?  Maybe, as Senator Frantz said “If it is enacted as is, it’s going to cost the state of Connecticut a lot of jobs.”

Or maybe Frantz is selling his constituents a myth while the dealers along Putnam Ave. sell them Ferraris.

Worth a thousand words:

About this series: Each month, three New Canaan Democrats write essays on a common topic.  You can search for “3NCD” to find them all.  We present these to advance the public debate on important issues and to present a range of opinion within the Democratic party in town.

Essay 1:
The truth is that most places change over the course of one’s lifetime. Sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse and sometimes it’s just difficult to judge – they’re just different. For example, my Dad’s office of 40 years was located on Broadway in New York City, diagonally opposite the Flatiron building. His office on the 15th floor overlooked that building. The nearby park, which is the home of the original Shake Shack, was non-descript – we used to walk across it to get to the luncheonette catering to the business community. When he left in the early 80’s, the neighborhood was already in transition — architects had moved in where wholesalers of cameras and shoes had been. Today it is one of the more fashionable areas to work and live in Manhattan.

Why does a place change? Some causes are easy to identify, like the decisions to open or close transportation links, introduce or relocate businesses, or the impact of a natural disaster like a Hurricane Katrina. These decisions can create dramatic changes in a place rather quickly, which may or may not be permanent or long lasting. However, what I am interested in are the choices towns make which influence over time the character of a place and change it for better, worse or indifferent. Our little town of New Canaan is at such a crossroads; the choices it makes during the next five years will alter and affect over time the town and the townspeople who live here. Let’s consider education.

Education accounts for 65% of our town’s operating budget and our investment has paid us back handsomely. Our graduation rate is close to 100%, the majority of the town’s school age children attend public schools for part if not all of their education, and graduates are admitted to and attend top colleges throughout the U.S., which includes each year many Ivy League colleges and highly ranked public universities. Within the last three years, the New Canaan public school district has achieved national recognition as being one of the top public school district’s in the nation. After years of being in the shadow of Greenwich, its larger, more diverse, and wealthy neighbor, New Canaan has pulled ahead of it because of thoughtful, focused planning by our Board of Education, Superintendent and town government. And while education continues to represent more than half of our town budget, this is not the result of inflated budgeting or frivolous spending (as one of the other essayists points out) but a reflection of increased costs — in fact, our Board of Education and Superintendent have demonstrated sensitivity and flexibility in fiscal matters over the years.

For property owners, the benefit of living in a community supporting a proven, high performing school district is that families want to live here and are willing to pay top dollar for our residences. Our school district has always enjoyed a local reputation as being home to one of the better Fairfield County public school districts, but now, owing to the investments we have made as a community; we enjoy a reputation that is known nationally and internationally. I do not think we should underestimate this achievement and its positive economic ramifications.

Demographically, the town is split between its population of empty nesters, those between the ages of 55 and 75 and its families with school age children. How many of these empty nesters will stay or leave during the next ten years? How many grandparents’ homes will become their grandchildren’s homes? (I know of three young families who moved into their parents’ homes because of the excellent public school education.) The trends suggest that some empty nesters will move out of their homes and into smaller residences — hence the interest in building more apartments/town homes for independent seniors– and that some will choose to remain in their homes. The irony is that in order to move into those smaller residences, seniors will need to sell their single family homes to young families attracted to the town’s schools.

As the population ages and remains in town, there is a projected demand for new services for our senior citizens. What could be some of the economic ramifications of these projected new demographics? A decline in families and a school age population will mean less families with multiple cars, more available parking and less commuters. (Could that lead to a reduction in train service? How could a reduction in service impact the town’s future as a country escape from NYC? Does anyone remember the years of lobbying it took to increase the service?) The town could earn a real estate windfall should one of the school buildings be closed and sold to a developer. One of the regional hospitals could expand its clinical services in town to service our seniors. Conversely, with the increased demand for health services, we may see an increase in the demand among healthcare professionals for better residential choices, and services that cater to their population’s needs, e.g. good schools for their children.

Perhaps, before entertaining a divisive tax structure that pits different demographics against one another, we should examine whether we wish to become a single demographic community or whether we want to retain our multi-generational character. I suspect that the latter will be true and if so, then it behooves us as a community to tackle our future fiscal challenges from a shared perspective and appreciation of how our town’s asset, education, impacts positively our town’s economy, services and character. Yet, if it is the former, then I trust that future plans being put forward will reflect that choice, .e.g. the folly of a town parking structure.

Essay 2:
My New Canaan property taxes are $14,800. Therefore, with one child in school system –at the 2012/2013 cost of $18,500 per student- I am gaining $3,700 worth of education (in addition to other services) for free. I am much appreciative to those of you who subsidize my New Canaan lifestyle.

Next year however, my son is off to college and it becomes my turn to subsidize others. I have no problem with this process. That is the way it is supposed to work.

New Canaan residents receive good value for their education budget. Our schools are the foundation for strong families, community and property value. So far, there does not seem to be any concern or push-back on costs that increase at a faster rate than property values, inflation or household income. It is an investment the Town is happy to make.

In the 5 years ahead, Town demographers forecast New Canaan will have ~200 fewer students: 3964 vs 4126. These same demographers forecast we will have an unchanged town-wide population of ~20,000. Together, these forecasts suggest there are likely to be more empty-nest families like mine.

I hope they are all as committed to New Canaan schools as I am. If not, there might be turmoil in The Next Station to Heaven.

Essay 3:
Last month we discussed “user fees” and why they really don’t move the needle much in reining in the town’s budget. Now it’s time to talk about the 800 pound gorilla that sits in the middle of every debate about budgets and property taxes – our schools. Full disclosure: (1) I sent my daughter to NC’s schools from third grade through high school – she received a wonderful education from dedicated, accomplished, professionals. (2) I believe strongly that every generation bears a responsibility to educate the next and that the costs and benefits of that responsibility extend (although perhaps not equally) to the entire community, not just parents. That said, however, we face some tough challenges.

Some numbers: New Canaan’s school enrollment is somewhere around 4200 students. We spend (or will spend) around $18,000 to $20,000 per student per year. In the upcoming town budget, schools are roughly: 67% of the operating budget, 40% of capital expenditures, and 58% of total debt service costs. For fiscal year 2012-13 we will spend about $84 million of the town’s roughly $130 million budget on education. These are big – gorilla size – numbers, almost all paid for by property taxes.

Don’t get me wrong – New Canaan’s Board of Ed. and school administrators/teachers do an excellent job. You only need to look at our state or national educational rankings, SAT scores, college admission results, etc. to know that they work hard and that we are getting our money’s worth. The school system they are responsible for is one of the primary drivers in attracting young, successful, families to our town. Furthermore they are fiscally responsible, given their mandate. For example this year’s proposed education spend for operating costs (arguably the most “controllable” of any budget item) is up by less than 2% which is, in my view and in these times, quite a remarkable achievement.

Nonetheless, no matter how well managed the process or how successful the results – $84 million is a lot of money. What drives these gorilla sized numbers? The short answer is – we do. New Canaan has precisely the educational construct that it, in the past, has opted to have. Today’s problem is: Can we continue to pay for that educational construct given what appear to be some fundamental shifts in our town’s reality?
The town population is aging, placing demands on tax revenues for different services and raising questions of burden sharing. (Tax rebates or reductions for those without children? Tax surcharges for families with more than one child enrolled?)
Young families appear to be having fewer children but rightly expect continued excellence in the educational options available to them. With stable or declining enrollment on the horizon we will face questions about our physical plant. (Keep our 3 primary schools or consolidate?)
The town’s non-educational infrastructure is declining and many of its operating assets are in need of repair, refurbishment, or replacement. (Town Hall, Fire Station, first responder and emergency services, etc.) How do we fund these requirements in the face of our recent very modest-to-flat growth in gross tax ratables? (Higher property taxes versus reduced educational expenditures?)

School costs in New Canaan are NOT the result of mismanagement, waste, or profligate spending – quite the contrary. They reflect, instead, an installed cost base (with a relatively high component being fixed costs) that responds to a previous – but not necessarily unchanging – reality. This is one of the classic definitions of a structural financial problem. Like all such problems, solutions will be both tough and painful. My own view is that we cannot sacrifice our commitment to maintaining excellence in our educational construct (it is critical to our “New Canaan” brand) but we will have to struggle with questions of optimality in terms of its physical plant, curricula offerings, and class size. My own experience in dealing with structural mismatches in the private sector leads me to the view that we will need to couple those questions with some form of “hard ceiling” share of town revenue (e.g. educational expenditures within the town budget not to exceed some % of revenue) in order to provide the Board of Education a broad working template within which to come up with “right-sizing” solutions while providing the rest of the town budget with increased access to tax revenues (perhaps incorporating some version of “burden sharing” mentioned above) to address our emerging needs.

Structural problems do not solve themselves – they get worse. They cannot be fixed overnight or with band aids. Their solutions will prove contentious and painful. Ignoring them will prove disastrous.

The other night, the GOP held their non-Presidential primaries and caucuses in Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri (are any of the candidates Presidential?  Yeah, I didn’t think so).  Rick Santorum did well (see!).  But another candidate, Newton Leroy Gingrich, did not even appear on the Missouri ballot.  In the upcoming Virginia primary, he famously failed to qualify for the ballot as well.

Each state has different rules for primary ballot access.  So who will be on the ballot for Connecticut’s April 24th primary and how do they get to be listed?  Well, we find out tomorrow, and it’s up to the Secretary of the State.

On February 10th, the SotS will declare which candidates are “generally and seriously advocated or recognized” as Presidential contenders.  Isn’t that interesting? Fringe candidates can be excluded by a decision of the Secretary of the State.  Clearly, the SotS, Denise Merrill, will not exclude any of the four main candidates for the GOP nod: Romney, Gingrich, Santorum and Paul. But it will be interesting to see if, say, Buddy Roemer makes the cut.

Excluded candidates can petition (but that’s a tough slog statewide).  In the past, excluded candidates have sued. But the process has been upheld by the courts, and it’s just the way we do it here in sensible Connecticut.

Tomorrow, we’ll who gets the opportunity to lose to President Obama badly in November.

Please join elected officials, candidates, and other supporters of the New Canaan DTC for an evening of good food, good company and great discussion of the political scene in 2012.

Wednesday, February 29th
6:30 to 8:30 p.m.
Waveny House
Waveny Park, New Canaan

Dinner by the bite, wine, beer and soft drinks served

Purchase tickets now

Directions and More Info…

About this series: Each month, three New Canaan Democrats write essays on a common topic.  You can search for “3NCD” to find them all.  We present these to advance the public debate on important issues and to present a range of opinion within the Democratic party in town.

Essay 1
Brace yourself for an increase in property taxes. The first read of the New Canaan 2012/2013 budget suggests an 8 to 10% increase in spending not including an additional $18 to $20m in debt. Taxes are not fun. Making tough budget choices are even less fun. But if we are to have any success in reducing these numbers, we will have to ask ourselves which of these requests are needs vs. wants.

Very clearly, there are certain Town services which are needs including police, fire and health & welfare. Although we might argue how much of these services we need or to what standard we require, I think we can all agree they should be funded by general account taxes. Alternatively, there are other services which are more clearly wants, including Waveny Pool, Paddle Tennis Courts, dog parks and brick lined sidewalks. And with great credit to generous private donors and user-fee patrons – I think we have arrived at a good private/public balance on how to fund these things.

New Canaan collects ~$120m in revenues. Over 90% of these revenues are property taxes, the rest are user fees, conveyance taxes, parking permits, etc. Very gradually, and very appropriately, the town has increased the proportionate amount user-based revenues vs. property-tax revenues. User based revenues include pool fees, paddle court fees, parking fees, Waveny House rental fees, a surcharge to homes that have central sewage and even an occasional consideration of a surcharge for homes that get town-provided leaf collection.

Where the discussion becomes tough, really tough, is around services which are somewhere in-between needs and wants including the Library, Lapham Community Center, and EMS services. These services are not uniformly used by all residents but are heavily funded by the Town. Granted, having some sort of EMS facility is a statutory requirement and having a Library is almost a requirement of civility and culture. But the question remains, to what degree should these services depend on private funding (donors and user-fees) vs. general taxpayer supported

I am not suggesting the current model needs to change; nor are we currently facing some type of budget crisis. But I do believe we need to constantly reassess needs vs. wants. Planet Moon spendthrifts want everything for everybody including endless sidewalks, gilded libraries and valet medical transport but it does not require much vision to see the day that the Great Recession and the household de-leveraging that began in 2008 will continue for some time. Likewise, does not require much vision to see that a revenue stream that is principally based on property values is strained. The need vs. wants conversation –and how to pay for it- is looming.

click to enlarge graphs

Essay 2
Should public services other than fire and police which concern public safety such as education, library, and volunteer EMS or parks for that matter be paid for by the town i.e. by the taxes of all residents or should they be subsidized on some formula basis that involves use.  For example we do not pay to use the park but we do pay to use the pool during the summer.  

Perhaps, before answering this question, we define what we mean by “public.” Who is the public? Webster’s defines public when used as a noun, as “the people as a whole: populace” and secondarily as “a group of people having common interests.” If used as an adjective, such as in the “public interest,” then it is defined as “of or relating to, or affecting the people as a whole or serving the community.”

Herein lays the problem, I think. We imagine ourselves as being a member of the populace or public however within that populace we recognize that there are conflicting publics- groups of people sharing different common interests. For towns, these two definitions can create a dueling relationship and sometimes antagonistic relationships regarding usage of town services and the definitions of community. To understand how our town services serve our populace, we need to recognize how these services benefit our town and the communities within our town. And, I think we need to appreciate and define the value added benefits of living in a community which provides services to everyone equally regardless of usage versus a community which charges for public services based on usage. Furthermore, we need to define which services do indeed provide a value added benefit to the community-at-large, and then rank them in some order.

For example, the need for public safety trumps any discussion of community benefit analysis. We all willingly pay taxes to support and maintain the services of a competent fire department and local police force. I would argue that a Volunteer EMS teams also falls under the umbrella of public safety as it provides a health safety net to each of us in an emergency situation where a visit to the emergency room may not be necessary or perhaps more importantly could be necessary and their proximity and response time is a decisive factor. Could we call an ambulance – yes but most insurance policies will not pay for an ambulance unless you are taken to the hospital and oftentimes a hospital visit is not necessary. This is a health service provided by local citizens to their neighbors on a volunteer basis – none of us can predict whether we will have an emergency situation (just like none of us can predict if we will have a house fire) but we can be comforted that some of our tax dollars go towards subsidizing this service. Seven years ago, my 79 year old mother who was visiting from Florida, felt faint while walking with her grandchildren on Elm Street during the sidewalk sales. She had become dehydrated. We were grateful that there was an EMS team to take her pulse and blood pressure.

What of other town services such as our parks, Lapham community center, television station and library? How should these services be evaluated? I have never used the Lapham community center which though open to all adult members of the community is the town’s defacto senior center. Should the town subsidize a center that is primarily used by one segment of our community and closed on the week-ends? The town does charge for the usage of the pool during the summer but the charge is seasonal, relatively minimal and used to offset the cost of maintenance for a specific benefit to specific town consumers – swimmers. Following this logic, I suppose one could argue that dog owners should purchase a town pet license that grants them access to our dog park. The Center is located in Waveny Park which is used by our young people, families, and dog owners. I do not think it is wise to begin assessing services based on usage by particular segments of our population as we risk destroying the purpose of having these services in the first place – the enhancement of our community. Haven’t we all decided to live in New Canaan because our town has parks and a community center for its seniors and a teen center for its youth? These services contribute to the vitality of our community by creating public spaces where we can meet and gather together not as separate groups sharing common interests but as particular members of our town – the town we all take pride in because we are a community.

The problem is our town’s financial resources are limited and our tax base is stretched. No one wants to see their taxes increase unless …the town can justify that the taxes we pay are going towards improving, enhancing and adding value to the town. As taxpayers, we realize this value in the added benefits these services bring to the property values of our homes- people want to move into our town because of the services our town offers.

It seems to me that if we are going to discuss charging for so-called public services, then we must determine how to rank which public services add the most value to our town’s future as it relates to qualify of life for its residents and the capacity to attract new residents. We need to understand which public services preserve and sustain our sense of community and how those services are valued by those who wish to join our community- the factors which enhance our property values. Let’s be clear on what we treasure and not destroy it inadvertently by marginalizing our community.

Essay 3
I confess to a certain level of support for a “pay as you go” approach to municipal budgeting and – in general – think that imposing user fees on certain town sponsored activities (pool, lawn and paddle tennis permits, use of the transfer station, metered parking, are examples) is not without merit. To extend that approach however, as some have suggested, to services such as the Ambulance Corp and the Library is difficult to understand. I think philosophically it is ill advised, from a management perspective it would be hard to implement, and from a revenue standpoint (after administrative costs are considered) would most likely be trivial. Worse, it would be another example of stratifying New Canaan’s citizens by income, further eroding our sense of community which is essential to maintaining a thriving town.

The Roman poet Juvenal, in ruminating on what people should most desire, declared “Mens sana in corpore sano” (a healthy mind in a health body) as a worthy aspiration. Imposing user fees on the Library or Ambulance Corp. would make us 0 for 2 in old Juvi’s book

Both the Ambulance Corp and the Library have fairly robust fund raising activities which are well supported by New Canaan residents and both rely quite heavily on hundreds and hundreds of hours contributed by many, many volunteers. It is at least worth wondering what might happen to that financial support and volunteer activity should we turn those services into a fee-for-access proposition. Finally, fees of this type disproportionately impact those most reliant upon them but least able to pay. I suppose this would be OK if we wanted to turn New Canaan into a gated community but last I checked none of us want to live that life style (or otherwise we already would.)

I agree that we have a financial challenge. Town costs (much of them uncontrollable – at least in the short to medium term) are rising at rates faster than either the growth in the grand list or (given our reliance on the financial services industry) median family income. This does not bode well. Clearly we cannot assume that there is an inexhaustible ability of home owners to pay ever increasing property taxes and hard choices will have to be made. Perhaps at some point the town will need to reduce, or even eliminate its direct financial support to many “quasi-public” services, or explore consolidating selected essential services with neighboring towns, and even perhaps look to reduce them. This is a structural problem, exacerbated by our changing demographic profile. Fixing it will require unpleasant structural fiscal re-engineering.

It won’t be solved by ill-advised nickel and dime user fees.

When life gives you crazies, make crazyade: