The Board of Finance wasn’t able to complete its review of the Board of Selectmen‘s proposed Fiscal Year 2027 budget on Monday, Mar. 23, with members saying the numbers aren’t adding up and at least one expressing serious concerns about errors, missing information, a lack of transparency, and delays in getting clear answers from Town Hall.
Ongoing issues have pushed this year’s review process much later than usual, delaying when the budget would typically be finalized ahead of the public hearing. As a result, this year’s hearing has been set for the latest allowable date — Monday, Mar. 30 (7 p.m. at Middlebrook School auditorium) and residents the proposed Fiscal Year 2027 operating budget before it has undergone full BOF review.
Editor’s note: The public hearing on the Board of Education budget — which met BOF guidance and moved through the budget process without similar challenges — will take place on Thursday, Mar. 26, at 7 p.m. at the same location.
BOF Chair Tim Birch told GOOD Morning Wilton that other components of the overall budget — including debt service and grand list data — will help inform residents as they provide feedback before his board begins final deliberations on Tuesday, Mar. 31.
Mounting Concerns
BOF member Kim Healy was the most vocal on Monday evening, expressing her incredulity with the state of this year’s budget and noting that the town’s FY 2025 finances have not yet been fully reconciled.
“I am so far from being able to give any comments on where I think the [FY 2027] budget should be because there are a lot of errors in the [proposed BOS] budget,” she said.
She also pointed out that the budget book was missing a page for the Board of Finance’s $100,000 budget, and said adequate information was not provided to reconcile some salary areas.
“I have serious concerns about the lack of transparency in the health insurance line and the IT spending,” Healy said. “Those were all consolidated into big buckets. The IT hardware line increased by 3,690%. There is no way for us to even evaluate that … This budget book does not have much backup for any of the numbers.”
Healy once again asked Chief Financial Officer Dawn Savo if she could reorganize some of the data — something she has requested of Savo and the Finance Department several times during the last several weeks — but Savo said she does not have time to do so and does not believe it is necessary.
“I have to resign myself to the fact that we’re not going to get a lot of things,” Healy said, “but if we can tie out salaries and benefits, we are 65% of the way there to having the budget analyzed properly.”
Voicing frustration with the BOS and the Finance Department’s failure to provide requested information within the necessary timeframe, Healy again submitted questions in writing on Mar. 23, seeking answers that may impact the board’s final decision.
Among them was a 16% increase in group insurance — including medical, dental, life and disability coverage — totaling a $634,703 increase over the current year’s $4,043,325 allocation.
Healy also raised questions about headcount growth, balancing operating costs for efficiency, DPW staffing and salaries, and operating capital.
“There are a lot of outstanding questions and telling someone with my background that I can’t have the information, it just sends off every red flag and it’s been happening for a long time,” she said, citing similar challenges of last year’s [FY 2026] budget process when she likewise struggled to get answers from Town Hall.
“I don’t think they’re too much to ask and I think some of them are really, really important,” Healy said.
Budget Cuts Eyed, with 3% or Less Mill Rate Increase the Goal
Despite the gaps in information, the board spent more than two hours Monday night discussing possible budget adjustments. Members acknowledged they were working with incomplete data, but signaled a goal of keeping any mill rate increase at or below 3%.
“The Board of Selectmen can go back and sharpen their pencils however they see fit,” BOF member Kari Roberts said. “We don’t decide that.”
BOF members discussed asking the BOS to reduce the current proposal by as much as $360,000 from the current proposed $38,821,769 budget, which represents a 4.56% increase over this year’s $37.1 million budget.
“We’re obviously working with some imperfect data in many respects and with issues where we’re not going to get perfect data and we’re going to have to make some judgment calls,” Birch said.
Birch said that, given a likely windfall from growth in the Grand List, he hopes to see $1.5 million set aside for non-recurring capital reserves in a new fund expected to be approved at the Annual Town Meeting.
“We are at least for the next few years blessed that we’re going to have a higher Grand List growth,” he said, adding that the town should focus on long-range planning while remaining mindful of tax increases.
Debate Over Revenue Assumptions
While the BOS operating budget remained difficult to fully assess, members turned their attention to other elements of the overall budget where they had more direct control.
They differed on where key financial assumptions would ultimately land, including debt service, grand list realization rate, and what may still be unresolved in current funds that the Finance Department has yet to thoroughly reconcile.
While the town has historically seen a tax collection rate averaging 99.3%, that number has declined. With some large property owners now challenging assessments, Birch said the rate could drop as low as 98.2%, though he expects it to come in around 98.6%.
BOF member Prasad Iyer, who estimated a more conservative 98.4% rate, argued the board should hold another executive session to review additional details, including supplemental billing and a potential back-tax sale still under consideration by the BOS.
Birch, however, said there was no additional information likely to change the Grand List realization and questioned whether another executive session would be a productive use of time given the board’s schedule.
“What I heard in the (previous) executive session is we will recover some of the money, not all,” Escalante said, suggesting a 98.7% rate.
In the end, the board agreed to set the rate at 98.6%.