The 2010 budget preparations are currently underway and the instructions to the town departments are to cut by 15% across the board. See this post. While I agree that a 15% reduction is prudent, I would not apply it across the board. The town has some functions which are required. Paying our notes, keeping records, assessing and collecting taxes, managing our accounts, educating children, and serving our veterans are among these. The town has some functions which are needed for public safety. Policing, health inspections, building inspections, and clearing the roadways are examples. Other activities of the town are optional. My preference will be ...
...to fully fund those activities which are required first, that are needed for public safety next, and if any funds are remaining the optional activities in some order of preference. We have to be honest and take a hard look at all town activities as well. Can we regionalize dispatch, animal control, conservation, Council on Aging and other activities? Can we outsource trash hauling, library services, road construction, building maintenance, snow plowing, etc? Then there is the question of union contracts and wage increases to be balanced against layoffs and consolidation. There is much to do and little time. We'll see what we can get accomplished.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Budget calculus
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
19 comments:
If I remember correctly the SB in a previous year (last year?) directed the EA and Fin Dept to cut across the board but not police. Can the SB come to a concensus on those 'essential' items and provide the EA and Finance Dir a similar directive? I agree it should not be an acrross th board type thing either, the SB should be able to set the course for the employees to follow no?
We really need to be open minded and I hope the town employees understand this during contract talks. These are tough economic times. Go to a Fin.Com meeting if you don't think so!
Bill - any thoughts on this?
Public safety, as it relates to the police department. If the last town override is an example of the voters monetary priorities, I will put public safety as number one. Emergencies occur at all times of the day or night. All 911 calls are directed into the police department, including fire calls. Our police officers patrol on a 24/7, 365 days a year. No such day as “sorry we are closed for the day.” No sign at the front door stating the hours we are open. As stated in the national public safety issue, with the increase in unemployment, is an increase in crime.
Public education is important. What other issue is more protected by federal/state laws? This is the area where most money is directed. More than half our town budget is consumed by our school department. School committee people are pro education and pro teacher salary increases. They, the school committee , can vote to increase teacher salaries with no concern for where the money will come from. This is unfair to our town and it's town related budgets. All town budgets, except the school budget, must be approved by the selectmen. This also includes all town employee contracts, except the school department. If all school employee's took a voluntary 5% salary decease, the town would have an additional 2,000,000 million dollars.
Your analysis of school spending is incorrect Ralph. The state mandates the minimum required net school spending (MRNSS) through a complex formula that dictates the minimum a town can spend on education. It also calculates how much the state will kick in towards that minimum amount. Dartmouth is at the minimum amount now and no 5% reduction in salary, to use your example, would result in a 'pay back' to the town of $2,000,000. Dartmouth spends the mimimum allowed I'm not sure how much clearer that can be to people. The schools are part of our town and investment in them is an investment in our town any way you look at it. As a per cent of its overall budget, Dartmouth is not out of whack with other citys and towns in the state. Within the MRNSS amount there is some discretion about where each years additional monies can go. Some goes to rising fixed costs, some to educational needs and some to salaries. The school committee also cannott simply 'increase salaries without concern about where the money will come from'either. Each year the SC wrestles with how to spend education dollars and even the most cursury glance at recent budget presentations would demonstrate that they certainly do know that money is limited and they cannot raise salaries without cutting something else. You might not agree with how they distribute funds but make no mistake they absolutely know they are limited by MRNSS limits.
Greg Jones
I posted about the school budget process here and you can start there to get an understanding of how the process works. Mr. Jones and others talk about Minimum Net School Spending (MNSS) as if it is some sort of austerity budget and I disagree with that assessment. Many districts can and do provide a good education while being funded at that level. The formula for calculating the foundation budget can be found here and a description of the formula for MNSS can be found here
You are correct that a 5% reduction would be about $2 million but that money would stay with the school department and not be available to the other town departments
Bill, I won't debate the merits of MRNSS with you as I feel the name describes it well enough. My hope with my post was to nip in the bud the idea that Ralph posted about how the SC can spend without concern about where the money comes from as well as the notion that simply cutting salaries 5% would put $2,000,000 back in the town's pocket. The schools will live with MRNSS for the forseeable future so it seems to make sense to look at how that money is best spent rather than to let stand misconceptions about how to lower that amount further.
I agree with anon 1:06 pm, Look at how the money is spent. I would like to see smaller classroom size at the elementary level, but with the many layers of bureaucracy I'm not sure that is possible. With this economic climate, I can't see any change. So, I agree, we really need to look at how the money is spent.
anon 1:39 - yes classroom size is a concern and becomes even more of an issue at the middle school level where average class size stands at 27 with several classes over 30 kids/class, the loss of even a couple teachers at the middle school would be a significant problem so that would be a priority for funding in my mind certainly. The limited physical space i.e. number of classrooms at this point at the elementary level becomes an obstacle to lowering class sizes there.
The school committee's upcoming meetings will focus on budgeting for the upcoming year so having more people sit in and weigh in with their opinions during this period I would think would be very helpful. In the past year the school committee has made it possible for the public to comment on most agenda items, a switch from past practices. Unfortunately not many people have availed themselves off the opportunity to speak about their concerns for a variety of reasons. Maybe that can change, which would not be a bad thing.
Greg Jones
Greg,
Thanks for posting that the school committee has changed the way they run their meetings by allowing comments on each agenda item. I have been to SC meetings in the past and felt that the SC had stifling public opinion down to a science. You could only comment at the end of the meeting and even then there were NO questions allowed.
I also liked your letter to the editor this past week but wish you had been more specific about what the new school priorities should be. Knowing that you keep a close eye on the school dept., it would be helpful to know what your specific suggestions are.
Thanks Wally,
I do thnk progress has been made on the SC meeting format front and this past week's presentation by the elementary schools as one 'team' of 3 schools each with individual needs and priorities but one goal was well done compared to previous year's individual efforts. I think credit goes to each school's administrative team and the new ass't superintendent. I wish some of the numbers were better but the problems faced were presented well and each school presented what they thought their specific needs were to help adddress the problems.
If I were to pick 3 critical priorities (I know there are more) I would want to see mathemetics get bolstered with qualified math coaches, library needs get addressed and some program put in place system wide to help those students that currently excel go further. From what I heard at the last meeting the science problems are a difficulty but they are based on 1 mcas exam given in grade 5 that is supposed to be a comprehensive exam of everything the kids have learned from k'garten to grade 5. The concensus was that a better review process could be put in place to satisfactorily address this shortcoming. We'll see if that is indeed the case by next year.
An argument could be made that these assessments are all based soley on MCAS scores and if one feels the MCAS is a bad measure of performance the results should be put aside. I happen to think that while the mcas is flawed it is what we have to work with so is as good a measure as any. Until the rules change we must work with them.
If I could add 1 more priority to the list it would be some way to get the word out to parents that they need to take a more active role in their kid's education. In the last few years that I've been paying attention to this stuff my eyes have been opened to the number of parents that really feel their role is simply to load their kids on the bus in the morning and take them off in the afternoon. Sometimes they can't even manage that. The number of kids that start kindergarten without apparently having opened a book before is amazing. I don't know where to begin to address this. It's a bigger problem than the schools can answer.
Forgot to add that I do know funds are limited so if any of these priorities are to be addressed the funds will have to be taken from somewhere else in the budget. This is also a contract year which makes the process that much more challenging. The school's admin have been asked to come to the next meeting with approximate costs to their priority needs so the SC can weigh them as they sort through the budget.
To be sure, we have other needs that range from lack of full day kindergarten, over-crowding at Quinn and the Middle School among them but those problems require long term planning and critical thinkning to address and go beyond what I would term short term critical priorities. These short term priorities are ones that could immediately effect the performance of kids in the system now and that's how I try to sort out critical short term priorities from longer term ones.
Thanks for listening,
Greg Jones
This discussion is quite interesting. It shows the quality of misinformation that permeates the town. Smaller class sizes? bureaucracy the problem? no the answer since we have no available classrooms we would have to reopen a school and hire teachers. Every square inch of every school is being utilized hence the discussion of moving the sped children to ease some overcrowding. MNSS was put in place to prevent towns from plundering the schools budget as I see some of your minions would have no quarrel with. Minimum net school spending is the minimum the town pays for its childrens education. The name says it all and no arguement can change the fact that its the bare minimum never mind the town charges which some are garbage but thats another arguement.
As it relates to total town spending, let's take a good look at how the town elected officials decide on budgetary issues. The total town spending is approximately 82,000,000 million dollars. I might be off by a million or two plus/minus.
Put aside the school department budget for now and concentrate on the non-school related budgets or approximately 40,000,000 million dollars. The BOS have control over all budgets except the school department. The elected school committee members have control for all school spending/budgets.
The BOS have several elected and appointed officials on various boards, and departments who make budget proposals before the SB. The SB has a director of finances. He/she is the town overseer of collectible monies and expenditures. The executive administrator, according to the town charter, has a five year financial plan in place. The finance committee are or a group of people appointed by the town moderator. They scrutinies all town budgets, including the school department budget. At the annual town meeting the fincm makes recommendations for or against all town related budgets. As the result of a known town monetary short fall, the SB have instructed all department heads to make a 15% reduction, across the board cut from their prior year. This will not be pretty. When everything is settled, the town will be lacking certain town services or at the least several unemployed town workers. This is a fact.
The school department budget is approximately 42,000,000 million dollars. No director of finances, no five year financial plan. The business manager has no control over school educational spending. He/she is the director of school transportation, custodians, maintenance personnel, school supplies and pencils. This is it folks. How much money is the position worth??
As mentioned, the school committee has some control over the school budget, but not all school spending. The state requires a minimum amount for school spending. The expected increase will be 4.5 % or 567,000 thousand dollars. A 3% salary increase will ad an additional one million dollars. Town meeting, by state law, must approve school spending. What ever happened to the school teacher contract that stated all teacher salary increase shall be based on toown meeting approval?? Did the school committee delete this clause???? Shame on you SCM.
The total short fall for this coming year will be 1.4 million dollars.
Ralphy,
Your comments are a little bit all over the place so I won't comment on their value but as far as the school budget is concerned,the FY09 school budget is just about$34,000,000 not $42,000,000 as you claim. Overstating the school budget by some 25% is not a good building block on which to base an argument any way you slice it.
Greg Jones
Ralphy is correct that the schools have $42 million if grants and other funds are added to what's appropriated from the tax levy. Just as he added those funds to the total town budget which is appropriated at $70 million but total spending is actually closer to $82 million
I'm willing to learn however the school budget listed on their web site for FY09 lists the budget at $31,100,454 after allowing for $2,284,101 in town charge backs. The latest summary of the town budget dated 1/09/09 from the FinCom lists the school budget as $33,141,539 and total school expenditures as $35,141,59. I do not know what accounts for the difference between those 2 figures so rounded it out to my figure of $34,000,000 which leaves some $8,000,000 between what is documented in widely available, independant budget sources and what Ralphy claims is the budget. I would be interested to know if there is some $8,000,000 in 'grants' or other funds that I have missed.
Greg Jones
As it relates to total money needed to fund all town department budgets, did I provide misinformation???? Hmmmm if so, allow me to be the first to report that the total amount may be incorrect, but the percentage is correct. The school department budget alone, is greater than the towns total operational budgets. In other words, the town will spend more money on schools, than all other non school related budgets. I did not intent to mislead anyone. You may insert or correct my monetary mistake, but the percentages are correct. How can the town allow one department to enjoy a 4.5 or 5% budget increase, while all other non-school departments must Indore a 15% across the board budget reduction?? Education is important to myself and to many other town tax payers. It's all the extra school elated programs that need to be eliminated. You can counter by stating all school programs are educational, from math to playing tennis. I disagree, too many programs are inserted into our schools, including art, homemaking, golf, tennis, and the list goes on and on. Each program calls for an additional salary, plus town insurance and the list goes on and on. I'm trying to suggest a cure for an unknown illness that is financially killing our town. Just keep this in mind, as it relates to the school department budgetary expenses, with little or no local control, it is the white elephant. Example: just look inside the ¾ empty school buses, drive to and from school. I mention school buses because it's the only visible school related expense that I can see. Although I'm a tax payer, I'm not allowed to walk into a school building or visit a class room. I know this all sounds stupid but just think for a second before you pass judgment. I witness police activity on our town roads. They are involved in our daily lives, as it may relate to accident investigation, speeding or just answering a simple complaint of unnecessary noise. I witness the town department of public works who are plowing streets, collecting garbage, and handling the transfer station, along with cutting brush and or doing other town repairs, while the white elephant sits in the middle of our town meeting sessions. So you know I'm wrong or selfish, so be it, but I'm speaking truth and truth has a way of hurting. I'll stick with truth.
Thanks for re-posting Ralphy,
Not my intent to trash anyone either but I do believe it is important to start any discussion based on what we know to be true and factual, hence my listing of where I got my school budget figures. From that starting point I understand that many people have different opinions on how the money should be spent or not spent.
Since you mentioned bussing as a cocnern, my understanding is each bus costs the town some $43,000 per year to operate, Ed Iacaponi I believe msi-spoke at this past SB meeting when he mentioned a much higher figure. Even at the $43k number they are an expensive cost no doubt. The half empty scenario you describe is largely a function of state rules that demand a district provide a bus for every student that is enrolled in the school district whether or not every sudent actually takes the bus. So it is possible for a bus to drive by many homes of kids and none of them choose to get on the bus for whatever reason. The capacity must be there for them. Is this right? I don't think so but it's another one of those rules that seem to get put in place and then is very difficult for an individual town to change. An option the SC may be investigating is making the walk route the largest allowed by law. I want to say its 1 1/2 miles for MS and HS but I could be wrong. By making the walk route as large as possible there may be an elimination of a bus or two-it should get looked at in my opinion and a determination of savings/benefit/loss should be made and openly discussed. You are no doubt aware that HS student's family's are now charged to $200 to take the bus to many people's dismay. This fee in essence is an unfair tax in my opinion on those families and is not generating the kind of money it needs to to make it worth while-that discussion should be had as well.
Finally, as I've said earlier we are at the MRNSS figure in town, thankfully, by law, we cannott go lower than that or from what I have witnessed here in town of late our school's budget would in fact be plundered.
As far as seeing your tax dollars at work in the schools, every single school administrator would only be too happy to give you a tour through any facility if you ask them too. You can see the obvious security neeed to prevent people from accessing the schools infettered I am sure.
Lastly the school budget as a percentage of town budget last stood at about 57% which when compared to most other municipalities is not out of line.
Greg Jones
Post a Comment