Yesterday, the State Senate passed two bills that essentially reversed two line-item vetoes issued by Gov. Ned Lamont earlier this week, with his own approval. One bill would release an additional $40 million to schools for the purpose of special education, and another that would release $2.88 millions in funds to various non-profit organizations.

While the original special ed funding bill passed with bipartisan approval, Republicans criticized the renewed push to fund non-profits, the selection of which they deemed to be politically charged. They also criticized the revenue-intercept method of funding laid out in both bills, calling it a “budgetary gimmick,” on the grounds that it would loosen the state’s fiscal guardrails and set a poor precedent going forward.

The contents of the bills passed yesterday were originally included in two omnibus bills that had already been passed by the General Assembly last week. On Monday, Gov. Lamont issued line item vetoes striking down the emergency release of funds, as they would have bypassed the typical committee vetting and public hearing processes. 

“The appropriations outlined in these sections circumvent the established budget process, allocating funds without the rigorous scrutiny typically applied to state expenditures,” wrote Lamont in his veto. “This not only undermines the transparency of our fiscal operations but also sets a precedent for bypassing budgetary controls.”

Additionally, Lamont worried that the $40 million allocation would exceed the spending cap, and argued that the $2.88 million allocation was done without proper consideration of organizational need, taking a “‘one-size-fits-all’ approach” lacking in “strategic prioritization and accountability.”

CTMirror reported on Tuesday that Lamont had reached a deal with legislators that would deliver both the $40 million in special ed funding as well as the $2.88 million, avoiding what could have been the first attempt at overriding a veto since Lamont entered office in 2019. The new non-profit bill stipulated the creation of an “emergency nonprofit assistance account,” and replaced the direct allocations to specific groups instead with language outlining what percentage of the funds would go to each cause, those causes being LGBTQ services, reproductive health, refugee and immigrant assistance and community and youth programs. 

The bill also clarified the funding source as money drawn from excess revenues to the General Fund per the projections of the state’s Office of Policy and Management (OPM), with the caveat that they only be disbursed if OPM’s future projections don’t render it fiscally infeasible. Lamont initially opposed both line-items out of concern that pulling from the General Fund directly would require downsizing in other areas of his budget proposals.

In a press conference held prior to the session, Speaker of the House Matthew Ritter (D-Hartford) said that the deal’s details were ironed out late Tuesday night, explaining that Lamont only vetoed the two items out of the belief that they would exceed the spending cap. When asked by reporters whether there would be any feasible difference in where the funds would come from or how the funds would be spent, Ritter admitted there were very few.

“I would say that the most significant difference is that the law clarifies that the money will be paid upon the consensus revenues that come out statutorily at the end of April, confirming that there is an operating surplus with enough funds to distribute the grants,” said Ritter. “I don’t think the bill is all that different, but there was just not enough communication.”

Any differences were lessened even further upon the introduction of an amendment to the non-profit bill that essentially reverted back to the original language; removing the more open-ended percentage allocation and reverting back to the direct selection of 24 different non-profits, though the allocations change. The Amendment passed in a 24-10 vote.

After its passage, Republican lawmakers took to criticizing the amendment both on the methodology of the funds’ disbursement, and the merit of the funds’ recipients. Planned Parenthood is the largest single recipient of the bill, receiving $800,000 in grant funding. Sen. Rob Sampson (R-Cheshire) cited the concerns issued in Lamont’s prior veto to criticize it.

“The whole thing is kind of remarkable to me, because the two bills that we sent to the governor last week, I didn’t support either of them,” said Sampson. “I just can’t find logic to suggest that the Governor could find a way to make an argument that he’s being consistent if he goes ahead and supports these bills today versus the ones he just vetoed.”

Sampson also criticized the priorities of the funding, citing the state’s “near crisis of affordability” and saying that he couldn’t “for the life of me understand the majority’s determination to spend taxpayer money on the items that are listed in this bill.” He also said he felt concerned that there weren’t enough controls in place to ensure the funding is spent where it ought to be, and even questioned the legitimacy of the organizations themselves, saying he doesn’t “know that they’re not fictional.”

“My understanding of the contract process through this, is that the very title of the organization gives you an idea on how the dollars will be spent,” replied Sen. Cathy Osten (D-Columbia), Chair of the Appropriations Committee. “Kids in Crisis, for example, is not going to be able to use the money when the contract is developed through them to fix the sink hole in front of their building.”

Ultimately, Sampson raised a strike-all amendment that would cut 23 of the 24 recipients in the original bill and instead allocate $1.45 million each to the state’s Meals on Wheels program and low-income Heating Assistance Program, while raising the amount of money the Jewish Home of Greenwich, a recipient included in the original bill, would receive. Democrats dug in on the original bill, arguing that the non-profits originally included need funds now more than ever as a result of President Trump’s policies and attitudes towards the LGBTQ community and women’s reproductive rights.

“We have people in Washington D.C., including the highest leader of this land, who is going after people who are gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning, and he’s going after women who are seeking healthcare and whose lives are on the line,” said Sen. Bob Duff (D-Norwalk). “That is exactly why we are funding this kind of a program, and these line items and this list of things, because that helps to make sure we are funding that, right this second.”

Duff called out his Republican colleagues, saying that he too supports the causes they outline in their amendment and has advocated for greater funding of them, but asked where the will from Republicans was to support funding these causes when bills were first being proposed.

“I ask some of my colleagues; where are the bills from January that increase the funding for these programs?,” said Duff. “Or is it just something we’re doing today?”

The Republican-backed amendment was rejected in an 11-23 vote. Prior to moving to vote on the bill as amended, Senate Minority Leader Stephen Harding Jr. (R-Salisbury) spoke in opposition on principle of the bill’s funding mechanism.

“Today we’re seeing one of those budgetary gimmicks, that I unfortunately believe that if you do it once, you can do it again, and again, and again, and you can forget the spending cap measures and the fiscal guardrail measures,” said Harding Jr. “These are important fiscal measures and if we begin this one step, as small as it may be, it begins, in my opinion, a floodgate towards ripping up those guardrails that have kept our state fiscally sustainable.”

The non-profit bill ultimately passed in a 25-10 vote.

Their criticism carried over to the special education bill, which used the same funding mechanism of revenue intercept funds being transferred to a separate emergency funds account. Republicans proposed several amendments to that bill; one which would relegate trans athletes to their gender at birth, one which would stipulate that the funding for the bill come from the General Fund outright, one which would end the emergency education fund account at the end of the fiscal year, and another which would increase the funding from $40 million to $92.2 million.

“We can devote and invest $92.2 million towards excess cost for our towns,” said Harding Jr. “And we could do it within appropriations, we could do it within the guardrails, we could do it within the confines of the spending cap, within the confines of the revenue cap.”

Sen. Eric Berthel, a member of the Select Committee on Special Education, said that towns “have been pleading with us” to help fund excess costs associated with special ed funding, and said that the $92.2 million number was picked because it provided school districts the most relief “right to the edge” of the spending cap. Sen. Gary Winfield (D-New Haven) said that going “right to the edge” didn’t “seem to be the most fiscally responsible thing that we could do.”

“We came in here a week ago and we said we know that our towns are in trouble and we’re going to offer them some help, we did not say we’re going to finish the conversation,” said Winfield. “This conversation has not been about finishing the budget process. This conversation has been about the emergent situation that we find ourselves in and finding some help.”

Harding Jr. himself admitted the possibility that, if amended, Lamont would veto the funds again, bringing them back to square one, and Sen. Sujata Gadkar-Wilcox (D-Bridgeport), co-chair of the Select Special Ed Committee, also mentioned that raising the funds would require the bill to again be brought before the house. Democrats argued that the purpose of the bill was to provide emergency funding, not be the end-all be-all bill on special education funding, and prioritized the urgency of the funds release over the quality of funds released.

Ultimately, none of the Republican amendments passed, and the special ed bill passed at its original $40 million funding level, in a 26-7 vote. After the conclusion of the vote, Harding Jr. released a statement in response, calling on Lamont to veto the bill a second time.

“Today, Senate Republicans offered – and voted for – an amendment to fund special education in CT the right way,” said Harding Jr. “Democrats instead cut a backroom deal. They offered a budget gimmick bill. They created an off-budget account. That’s not transparent. That’s not good governance.  It violates the fiscal guardrails. This is the type of fiscal gimmick that leads to future tax hikes Gov. Lamont: veto this gimmick bill.”

Lamont issued a statement himself after passage of the bill, showing no intent to veto.

“The improved versions of these bills that the legislature passed today maintain the fiscal discipline and adhere to the sound fiscal management practices that we need to keep our state on the right track,” said Lamont. “I appreciate legislative leaders for maintaining an open dialogue and understanding our important responsibility of sustaining a balanced budget. I look forward to signing these bills into law.”

Republish This Story

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.