Submitted by Lucia D. Jansen
Greenwich’s budget process is intentionally designed with checks and balances. Our town charter assigns responsibility to several bodies the First Selectman, the Board of Education (BOE), the Board of Estimate and Taxation (BET), and finally approval by the Representative Town Meeting (RTM).
Each step exists to ensure that major town building capital projects are reviewed, fully vetted, and approved before taxpayer dollars are committed.
The RTM has the authority to reduce or eliminate individual capital line items and authorizes the amount of debt the town will take on in any given year. In other words, the RTM is intended to be the final safeguard for taxpayers.
But the proposed FY27 budget introduces a troubling shift in that process.
Traditionally, large municipal building projects move through three funding stages. First, funds are approved for “studies and surveys” so a project can proceed through municipal improvement (MI) and land-use approvals (Town Charter Sec. 99). Second, funding is then provided for detailed architectural and engineering drawings. Only after those funding steps are completed does the town authorize the final construction funding appropriation.
This phased approach ensures that when the RTM approves construction funding, it does so with complete information about the project’s final design, scope, and cost.
The FY27 proposal for the Hamill Ice Rink departs from this process. Instead of following the traditional staged approach, the RTM is being asked to approve the full appropriation for a project that currently exists only as a conceptual design.
The mechanism used to justify this shortcut is the addition of so-called BET “conditions.” Under this approach, the RTM would be forced to approve the entire appropriation upfront while leaving it to the BET to determine later whether those conditions have been satisfied.
Supporters argue that this saves time by avoiding the need to return to the RTM once additional details become available. But the consequence is significant: once the RTM approves the full appropriation, even with the BET conditions, the project does not return to the RTM. Instead, the 12 members of the BET decide whether the conditions have been met and retains the authority to waive those conditions entirely. In effect, the final decision shifts from the RTM to the BET.
One of the most consequential projects proposed for FY27 is the $41 million replacement of the Hamill Ice Rink. Yet the proposal goes far beyond replacing the rink itself. The concept prepared by the Dorothy Hamill Skating Rink Task Force and adopted by the Department of Public Works includes a complete redesign of Eugene Morlot Park relocating the baseball field, moving the parking lot, altering the park entrance, and adding a 2 lane roadway, sidewalks, and lighting through the park.
The conditions attached by the BET do little to resolve the core uncertainties. Several elements clearly add significant cost to the project potentially greater than the $41 million, such as the new roadway, sidewalks, retaining walls, and relocation of the baseball field all of which remain undefined.
Another BET condition introduces the concept of a revolving fund to operate the rink. Under such a model, revenues would be expected to fully cover operating costs. However, the structure of that fund, its rules, limitations, and financial assumptions, have not been defined or reviewed by the relevant town bodies. Depending on how it is structured, a revolving fund could significantly change the programs and services provided at the rink.
There is still time to take a more responsible path. The BET should limit funding to the first two stages of the traditional process, MI and A&E drawings, so the project can move through land-use approvals with a fully developed design. The RTM could then review and approve the plans for bidding before any final construction appropriation is considered.
Alternatively, if the BET does not revise the proposed Hamill budget item, the RTM could reduce the $41 million appropriation to an amount that funds those initial stages.
Either approach preserves the charter’s required funding process which ensures decisions of this magnitude are made with complete information. At present, the RTM will be asked to approve a
$41 million project prematurely that departs from the charter.
If the RTM approves full funding before the final design is known and the project never returns for review it raises a fundamental question: does the RTM still serve its intended role in Greenwich’s system of checks and balances? Such approval would effectively signal that the
RTM is willing to cede its authority as the town’s final decision-maker on major town building projects.
Lucia D. Jansen is a former member of the Board of Estimate and Taxation and served for 18 years on the RTM