Why the FY2027 Budget Deserves a Second Look
By Rickford Kirton
Former Deputy Mayor, Town of Bloomfield
Bloomfield residents have successfully petitioned the FY2027 budget to referendum, giving voters an opportunity to weigh in directly on one of the most important decisions facing our community: how public dollars are spent and whether the adopted budget reflects the priorities residents expect.
This referendum is not about politics.
It is about affordability, transparency, accountability, and whether the Town has struck the right balance between services, administration, and taxpayer impact.
The Town Council adopted a FY2027 budget totaling approximately $118.4 million, representing an increase of roughly $4.8 million (4.25%) over the prior year budget. Officials have emphasized the 3.07% mill rate increase, but many residents believe that figure alone does not tell the complete story because Bloomfield remains in Year 2 of the four-year revaluation phase-in.
Impacts Greater Than the Advertised 3.07%
For example, a property that experienced a 51% assessment increase could see an estimated overall impact approaching 7.44% when the revaluation adjustment is combined with the Council-approved budget increase.
Properties with 60% assessment growth could approach 9.11%, while assessments increasing 65% to 70% could experience impacts ranging from approximately 10% to nearly 11%.
This distinction matters because much of the public discussion has focused on the 3.07% figure, while many taxpayers may ultimately experience something significantly different depending on reassessment changes.
Budget decisions affect more than homeowners. Property taxes and operating costs can influence rents, commercial costs, housing affordability, and the broader local economy.
A Community-Wide Conversation
Many residents have also asked whether spending priorities deserve additional review and whether administrative growth has kept pace with affordability concerns facing taxpayers.
The adopted budget keeps Operations & Communications near $670,000, while Information Technology exceeds $1.4 million. Residents are not questioning the existence of these departments; they are asking whether spending levels reflect current affordability realities and whether resources are aligned with essential services and long-term priorities.
Rising Costs and Reserve Depletion
Another area drawing significant attention is the Metropolitan District Commission (MDC) cost increase.
The FY2027 budget projects MDC costs at more than $4.23 million, representing an increase of approximately 15% from the prior year. Residents deserve a clear explanation regarding why Bloomfield is projected to experience an increase of this magnitude and how it compares with other municipalities within the Metropolitan District.
At the same time, the Town plans to utilize approximately $3.665 million from fund balance reserves to support the adopted budget. Reserve usage can be an appropriate financial tool, but taxpayers should reasonably ask whether continued reserve usage combined with rising taxes represents the best long-term path forward.
Residents understand that quality services, infrastructure, public safety, recreation, and long-term planning require investment.
A Question of Priorities and Balance
The question is whether this budget reflects the right priorities, the right level of administration, and the right balance between services, affordability, and taxpayer impact. These are legitimate policy questions that deserve public discussion.
The referendum effort itself also reflects significant public participation. The petition required approximately 1,136 signatures, representing 7.5% of Bloomfield’s registered voters. On May 18, a total of 1,226 signatures were submitted for review. The signatures are currently undergoing the required verification process.
We did not petition this budget because we oppose investment in Bloomfield.
We petitioned it because we believe affordability matters.
We believe transparency matters.
We believe accountability matters.
The referendum now gives residents the opportunity to decide whether this budget reflects the right priorities, at the right cost, for the Bloomfield we want to build.
There is still a lot of lard in this budget. It can be excised without hurting services. Kevin Gough complained that people were offering no ideas about what to cut. Nothing could be further from the truth. If anyone was keeping track, I'm sure there were over $2 million in cuts recommended.by citizens. If the referendum produces a NO vote, the Council should review all the public comments, spoken and written. They need to listen. They don't. The biggest single offense, and the one spoken of most often, was a budget item as well as a legal issue. The Council needs to deal with an over-compensated Town Manager by cutting his salary and benefits. They also need to terminate his employment and choose another. How many times do they need to be reminded that the man is illegally employed by virtue of his non-residence and failure (his and the Council's) to abide by our town charter?
ReplyDeleteFACTS!!!
DeleteBloomfield residents should take the FY2027 budget referendum seriously because it is about more than taxes alone. It is about whether the Town’s financial priorities align with the needs of the community and whether taxpayers are receiving full transparency regarding how public funds are being spent.
ReplyDeleteThe article “Why the FY2027 Budget Deserves a Second Look” raises several legitimate concerns that deserve thoughtful public discussion, not dismissal. Among the most important issues are the rapid increase in legal expenditures, questions surrounding procurement oversight, and whether essential community services are being reduced while administrative and outside-consultant costs continue to grow. Residents have every right to ask whether these decisions reflect the best interests of the town.
A healthy municipal government depends on transparency, independent oversight, and public confidence. When large budget overruns occur, especially in sensitive areas such as legal spending, taxpayers reasonably expect detailed explanations, competitive review processes, and clear accountability mechanisms. Calls for forensic audits, rebidding of contracts, and stronger legislative approval requirements are not radical ideas — they are standard good-governance principles intended to protect both taxpayers and public institutions.
The referendum process itself is also an important democratic safeguard. It gives residents a direct voice in determining whether the adopted budget properly balances affordability with services. Supporting a “second look” at the budget does not mean opposing government or public employees. It means recognizing that taxpayers deserve clarity before being asked to absorb higher financial burdens.
Most importantly, public debate should remain focused on facts, fiscal stewardship, and long-term sustainability rather than personalities or political divisions. Bloomfield residents benefit when questions are answered openly, financial data is accessible, and elected officials actively demonstrate accountability to the public they serve.
Regardless of where residents ultimately stand on the referendum, greater transparency and stronger oversight can only strengthen public trust in Bloomfield’s government.
Do we dare ask whether Bloomfield's Challenges exist due to lack of leadership from our Mayor. He is a nice guy but brings zero skills to the table. We also need to eliminate Joe Merritt who is like expired milk, who should have retired multiple years ago.
ReplyDeleteRickford is correct about the MDC budget. It is overstated. All you need to do is check out the formula the other member towns used in their budgets which is what Rickford used. Are you going to believe the other towns or the "CFO" at the MDC, who in addition to being new is the one who approved all of Erin Stewart's P Card purchases?
ReplyDelete