Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gettr, Truth Social, Twitter, YouTube

By David Holman

Because the proposed budget was rejected a second time at referendum on May 19th, the Guilford Board of Finance held a public meeting on May 26th to consider reductions in the budget before sending it out to referendum a third time on Tuesday June 16th. At this meeting, despite multiple Guilford residents expressing the need for the BOF to limit any increase in the budget to no more than 2.8% (which was the core rate of inflation in March when the original budget was approved, and also the cost of living adjustment for social security recipients in 2026), the BOF opted to decrease the $128,663,203 budget rejected at referendum on May 19th by only $700,000. The result is a new proposed budget of $127,963,203 which still represents a huge $5.41 million increase, or 4.23% increase, over our current 2025-26 budget of $122,554,319. It is unnecessarily too high (specifically $2 million too high) and therefore needs to be rejected a third time at referendum on June 16th.

It is important to understand that the agenda for this May 26th Guilford BOF public meeting to consider reductions in the budget before sending it out to referendum again on June 16th was very different from the agenda for the April 27th Guilford BOF public meeting to consider reductions in the original budget which was rejected on April 21st. Specifically, the agenda for the April 27th public BOF meeting called for a Public Forum where comments would be limited to three minutes first, followed by discussion by the BOF to take possible action on revision of the proposed 2026-27 budget. In contrast, the agenda for the May 26th BOF public meeting, called for opening remarks from BOF Chairman Ayles, Board of Education Chairwoman Balestracci, and First Selectman Matt Hoey without a time limit first, followed by a Public Forum where comments would be strictly limited by timer to 3 minutes, prior to discussion by the BOF to take possible action to revise the proposed 2026-27 budget. This was an intentional change made to ensure that the administration controlled the narrative.

During this May 26th meeting, there were several incredible comments made by our elected officials which need to be highlighted and commented on as follows:

• BOF Chairman Ayles commented after several Guilford taxpayers called for limiting any increase to the budget to 2.8% or $3.43 million, “I am not willing to entertain a draconian total budget reduction of $2.7 million.” When explaining how he came up with his recommended $700,000 reduction in the budget, Chairman Ayles explained, “based on what has been stated tonight, we should be focused on getting the actual tax increase under the 2026 (social security) cost of living increase of 2.8% … for a combined reduction of $700,000, this would result in a (property) tax increase (for Guilford taxpayers) of 2.73%.” In other words, Chairman Ayles corrupted our legitimate request to limit any increase in the budget to 2.8% and equated it to a 2.8% increase in our property tax. The fact is that a 2.8% increase in the budget would result in a much lower increase in our property taxes (something closer to 1%). Why not do that?
• First Selectman Hoey displayed his continued disrespect for the taxpayers in Guilford when he said, “While the percentage of voters at the (second) referendum increased from 22% to 27%, the margin of defeat shrank from 260 to 104 votes. Not anywhere near a mandate. I suggest that this does not call for drastic action on the Board of Finance, and I urge moderation in your deliberations.” In other words, I don’t care if Guilford taxpayers are hurting, can’t afford another large tax increase, and rejected the budget two times.
• BOF member Rob Federici commented, “I want to send the budget back out with a 0%-dollar reduction.” More arrogance and disrespect on display.
• Meghan Scanlon admitted that not one member of the Guilford Board of Selectmen, Board of Finance, or Board of Education did anything to try and mitigate the huge budget increase in medical insurance coverage for 2026-2027 when she commented, “I agree we should look at our health insurance. I don’t disagree that we should go out for an RFP (Request for Proposal). We have talked about doing that in terms of our healthcare working group going out for an RFP, not just for the carrier, but for the actual broker, which we have not done.” This is an incredible admission since the largest increase in the budget by far is for medical insurance. When Guilford last requested an RFP in 2024, it resulted in savings of $600,000. Why then did we not request an RFP this year?
• Finally, Board of Education Chairwoman Balestracci commented about instructional coaches (non-classroom coaches who work only with teachers and administrators), “professional learning ensures instructional continuity and equity.” Apparently “equity” rather than classroom instruction and student performance is the highest priority in Guilford Public Schools.

Bottom line, we need to reject this new proposed budget of $127,963,203 again at referendum on Tuesday June 16th . Any increase in the Guilford 2026-2027 budget must be limited to 2.8% which would result in a new budget of $125,985,840 but still include a massive increase of $3.43 million. This is the maximum increase that Guilford taxpayers can reasonably be expected to endure, especially considering that property revaluation and another potential tax increase looms this Fall.

David Holman is a Guilford, Connecticut, resident.

‘NO AD’ subscription for CDM!  Sign up here and support real investigative journalism and help save the republic!'