North Stonington — The finance board on Tuesday presented a budget proposal that was $344,382 leaner in the second attempt to get the town's budget for this fiscal year approved.

The cuts were made by the Board of Finance following the failure of both town and school budgets at the June 20 referendum.

The second referendum will be held beginning at 6 a.m. Tuesday, Sept. 20. 

The budget now stands around $18.8 million, with the mill rate set at 27 mills.

While the mill rate increased, there was no tax increase for the average taxpayer due to a decline in the town's grand list.

During a short presentation at the beginning of the meeting, Board of Finance Chairman Tim Main II said that the board focused on spending reports through the end of May and tried to cut from line items that hadn't been spent so close to the end of the fiscal year.

First Selectman Shawn Murphy said Tuesday he felt he was not consulted on those cuts, which he says will close the transfer station on Saturdays, delay highway maintenance and make it difficult to demolish several dilapidated town structures.

He said the budget has $425,000 set aside for future payments on the Center for Emergency Services building, which could be reduced to restore highway money, and he felt it was unwise to pay down that future debt if it will cut services this year.

Voters approved $6.36 million for the emergency services building in 2013.

Members of the finance board, however, want to start saving for future loan payments. Saving now, they argued, would lessen the town's future debt load when it needs to start paying for the $38.5 million school building project.

Following the first referendum, Murphy and the finance board argued over which line items to cut.

Murphy accused the finance board of not seeking information, while members of the board argued he did not provide enough information.

Later, after sparring over the meeting process, several finance board members walked out of a hearing they said was legally questionable.

A ballot format Murphy designed will ask residents to approve money for capital items separately, and ask nonbinding advisory questions about whether certain line items cut by the Board of Finance, such as the highway money, should be restored and CES money cut. 

Residents were divided on whether the impact to services would be tolerable.

Those who spoke approvingly of the finance board cuts included resident Brian Rathbun, who said that the board was "doing a heck of a job, finally we're getting some accountability in our budgets," though some, like Mike Urgo, noted that he didn't "think it's fiscally responsible to make a prepayment on a loan" for the emergency services building while cutting services.

But frustration with the lack of collaboration continued.

Joe Gross pointed out that the boards had not heeded the advice gathered in the 2013 Plan of Conservation and Development about how to make town government function more effectively.

People want "more communication ... (and) they want you to be nicer," Gross said.

n.lynch@theday.com