Paying More for Less in Bloomfield: Part 1 - The Reality of Bloomfield's Next Budget and the Fiscal Year 2027 Tax Hike
By Peter C. Frank | Editor-in-Chief, the Bloomfield Community Dispatch
April 10, 2026
BLOOMFIELD — Town Manager Alvin D. Schwapp Jr.’s proposed FY2027 budget document is presented to the public as an exercise in fiscal restraint and "shared sacrifice." The administration is asking taxpayers to absorb a 6.81% property tax increase to support a $117.1 million operating budget. While officials may claim the actual mill rate is remaining "flat" at 35.65 mills, this is a mathematical illusion. Because property values have increased under the revaluation phase-in, the true, revenue-neutral "equalized" mill rate for this year is actually 33.37. By pushing the rate back up to 35.65, the town is executing a 6.81% tax hike on residents.
The Math Behind the Hike: Actual vs. Equalized Mill Rate
During a property revaluation phase-in, the assessed value of properties increases year over year. If a municipality wants to remain revenue-neutral—collecting the exact same amount of tax revenue as the previous year—it must lower its mill rate to offset those higher property values. This revenue-neutral baseline is the equalized mill rate (currently 33.37 mills).
By choosing to keep the actual mill rate "flat" at 35.65 mills instead of dropping it to the 33.37 baseline, the town is applying a higher rate to higher property values. Pushing the rate from 33.37 to 35.65 mathematically generates a 6.81% tax increase (35.65 ÷ 33.37 = 1.0683). Keeping the nominal rate flat during a revaluation year is not a freeze; it is a guaranteed tax hike.
A rigorous financial analysis conducted by the Dispatch of the budget documents, cross-referenced with the town's latest audits, historical spending data, and public transcripts, reveals a systemic imbalance in how that sacrifice is distributed.
The data indicate that the administration is implementing significant reductions in public-facing municipal services—including the elimination of residential garbage collection, the closure of a recently repaired municipal pool, and reductions in eviction-prevention funds. Simultaneously, the budget authorizes double-digit percentage increases to internal administrative and overhead departments. Furthermore, an analysis of the town’s basic financial data raises critical questions regarding the accuracy and integrity of the numbers upon which these tax increases are justified.
To provide our readership (primarily the taxpayers and residents of Bloomfield) with an objective, verifiable account of the municipality's financial path, the Dispatch is launching a multi-part investigative series that will analyze the town manager's FY2027 proposed budget while simultaneously presenting mathematically viable, data-driven alternatives the Town Council can use to restore services.
Series Table of Contents
Part 1: We examine the proposal to eliminate residential trash collection, placing the liability directly on taxpayers, and counter this with a structural solution: utilizing the town's $23.7 million unassigned fund balance—which currently exceeds the legal policy ceiling—as a transitional bridge to preserve baseline services.
Part 2: Contrasting the 95.5% budget reduction to the municipal pool against double-digit expansions in executive administration, we present a framework to benchmark and consolidate non-union administrative compensation to generate sufficient capital to fully restore school-year recreation and aquatic programs.
Part 3: A quick investigation into the 21-month delayed FY2024 audit reveals the two material weaknesses cited by external auditors, and the inconsistencies surrounding the S&P credit downgrade. We outline the necessity of making audit compliance a capital-level priority and pre-funding the OPEB trust to rapidly restore the town's AA+ rating. (We have a 4-part series on the FY2024 audit coming soon!)
Part 4: A review of the Town Attorney's 127% budget overrun, driven by outside counsel and "undefined" billing. We propose mandating competitive rebidding, capping undefined billing, and budgeting realistic upfront costs to save hundreds of thousands.
Part 5: An exposure of revenue projection methodologies, including the underbudgeting of investment income by an estimated $1.6 million. We examine how correcting this estimate, combined with funding a dedicated Grant Coordinator, can generate massive municipal return on investment.
Part 6: An assessment of eliminated police vacancies and $0 capital contributions. We counter this infrastructure deferment with a blueprint for establishing a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district and utilizing Public-Private Partnerships to revitalize Wintonbury Mall without issuing general obligation bonds.
Part 7: An analysis of the town's fixed costs, the realities of collective bargaining agreements, and the Board of Education's 4.75% budget increase, measured against declining enrollment, poor outcomes, and other performance metrics.
Part 8: The final installment focuses on innovative, immediately implementable non-tax revenue solutions within Bloomfield's governance framework—including Municipal Broadband partnerships, Vacant Property Fees, Municipal Energy Aggregation, and Medical Self-Insurance Optimization—to permanently break the cycle of structural tax hikes.
The Cost-Shift Illusion
The most prominent service reduction in the FY2027 proposal is the outright elimination of residential curbside refuse and recycling collection. The town intends to reduce the Refuse Collection budget by $2.25 million—dropping the allocation from $2.55 million to $297,677, an amount strictly reserved for government facility waste.
During his presentation to the Town Council, Town Manager Alvin D. Schwab Jr. framed this as a tactical efficiency. "I removed $2.3 million from the overall budget," he stated. "If that's not of value to you, that's okay... but I took money off the top to keep taxes lower."
A financial analysis of this maneuver, however, demonstrates that it does not generate net savings for the taxpayer; rather, it is a direct transfer of liability.
Residents will now be required to contract with and pay private waste haulers out of pocket. Despite the municipality no longer bearing the $2.25 million operational cost for this service, the residents' property tax rate will still increase by 6.81%. The financial reality for the average Bloomfield homeowner is the absorption of a new, privatized monthly utility expense layered on top of a higher municipal tax burden. Based on current prevailing rates for private refuse haulage in the region, residents can expect to pay an estimated $35 to $60 per month out of pocket to independent providers such as Paine's Inc., All Waste, or USA Hauling & Recycling.
The Retained Surplus: A Solvable Deficit
The decision to eliminate baseline sanitation services is traditionally an indicator of severe municipal revenue shortfalls. However, Bloomfield’s balance sheet reflects a significant accumulation of liquid assets.
According to the administration's own FY2027 budget message and March 2026 Finance Committee presentations, the unaudited FY2025 year-end unassigned fund balance estimate sits at $23.7 million. This equates to 20.9% of the adopted FY2026 budget. Bloomfield’s own municipal policy mandates a reserve ceiling of 15% to 20%.
Despite holding reserves that exceed the town's maximum policy limit, the administration has proposed allocating $0 of this fund balance to offset the FY2027 tax increase or preserve at-risk services.
This policy choice was directly challenged during the budget presentation by Councilor Joe Merritt, the Council's longest-serving member. "There is utterly nothing gained from having more than the 15% that's called for. Nothing," Merritt stated.
The administration’s framing presents a false binary: either accept the elimination of trash pickup or accept an unmanageable 11.6% tax increase. The financial data provides a third, viable option.
Using a conservative midpoint of 17.5%, deploying the excess funds above the policy threshold would free approximately $3.5 to $4.0 million. While fiscal best practices generally discourage using reserves for recurring expenses indefinitely, using these excess funds as a transitional bridge is a standard municipal tool.
The Town Council holds the authority to set aside a portion of this $3.5 million overage to preserve essential services—such as the $2.25 million refuse collection—for a single fiscal year. This action buys the municipality 12 months to implement the structural revenue reforms and administrative right-sizing outlined later in this series, thereby generating the recurring savings necessary to sustain the services permanently without hoarding taxpayer capital above legal limits.
Check back early next week for Part 2: Administrative Expansion Amidst Public Service Reductions, where we investigate the administration's decision to expand executive compensation while defunding the municipal pool, and outline how benchmarking these salaries can fully restore recreation programs.
I’m going to have to move
ReplyDelete