It is not even 2015 and the mayoral politics are underway in New London, this time manifesting in a prolonged debate over what should be a routine matter - coming up with $425,000 to pay the increased costs associated with the new police contract. The City Council approved the contract 6-0 in early October.

The deal the Finizio administration reached with the union appeared to be fair, with police forgoing any raise for the year with no contract in place, while receiving two 1 percent raises this fiscal year and two 1.5 percent raises next. The police union obtained a scheduling change it sought and in return dropped numerous grievances.

Mayor Finizio recommends that the council move funds from a contingency account to cover the added cost. In an unusual budgetary move, the council, in preparing the budget for the fiscal year that began last July 1, set aside about $719,000 to add several positions, among them three police officers and a detective, and outside that department, a risk manager, facility manager and a grant writer.

The purpose appeared two-fold, one to exercise greater council control in that it would be required to approve expenditures from the contingency account and two, to find a ready-made line item that it could reduce or eliminate should voters reject the budget. Instead, four months into the fiscal, year, city voters approved the budget Nov. 4.

The city has tapped the contingency fund for other needs, and about $586,000 remains. The administration used the contingency to hire the risk manager but has not added any of the other positions, including police officers.

Councilor Michael Passero, who is challenging Mayor Finizio for the Democratic nomination for mayor, is among three councilors blocking the requested transfer. Fellow Democrat Michael Tranchida and Republican Martin Olsen, who have often voted as a bloc with Mr. Passero in opposing the mayor, again joined in opposition. The Democrats who often back the mayor - council President Wade Hyslop and councilors Efrain Dominguez and Erica Richardson - again did so.

Things remain stuck at 3-3 because Democratic Councilor Anthony Nolan, a city police officer, must abstain due to a conflict of interest.

Mr. Passero wants the money spent as intended - to boost the number of officers - not to underwrite the contract he joined with the council in approving. He suggests instead using money saved in other departments to fund the police contract, but contends the administration has not provided the information necessary to make that determination.

One has to wonder if Mr. Passero would be making all this fuss over an accounting debate if the mayor had stuck to his pledge not to seek re-election to a second term. Instead, Mayor Finizio announced Nov. 5 he was back in the race, a day before Mr. Passero made his formal announcement.

The fact is, councilors Passero, Olsen and Tranchida have enough information now to propose a transfer of money from other accounts to pay for the police contract. Mayor Finizio would almost certainly veto such a move - and has the votes to sustain it - because he considers it a bad idea. It is. Some departments may be running small surpluses now, but could run into financial problems later if they are cut.

The better option is tapping the contingency. Mr. Passero also complains that the administration did not move forward with the police hiring using the contingency fund, but that would not have made sense until voters acted on the budget and that was only a few weeks ago. By then the mayor knew he had a new police contract to fund.

It is a dispute more of form than substance. If the council remains deadlocked and Mayor Finizio does not spend the contingency money, it will be spent to balance the books at the end of the fiscal year in June.

Ideally, funds should have been set aside in the police budget for a contract settlement. Mayor Finizio said that would have been the case had the council not cut his police budget request from $8.9 million to $7.9 million.

The administration must do a better job of boosting police staffing, the mayor and council having jointly settled on a goal of 80 officers. Instead, the department remains stuck in the mid-60s, arrivals only keeping up with retirements. The reality, however, is that obtaining that goal will be a slow and challenging process for the fiscally struggling city.

In an election year with two top candidates holding office, debates and grandstanding will prove inevitable, but they should be reserved for issues of substance, not how to account for expenses the city is obligated to meet.