Danvers School Board OKs $32M Budget for 2012
The School Committee unanimously approved the proposed 2012 school budget Monday night, leaving intact job cuts, fee hikes and other reductions to achieve a balanced budget plan for the new school year.
Photos
The School Committee unanimously voted, 5-0, Monday night to accept the $32.06 million budget proposed by school administrators for fiscal 2012, which starts July 1. The budget will be presented before the Board of Selectmen Tuesday night at its regular meeting at 7 p.m. at Town Hall.
The budget, while still a 2 percent increase from this year, eliminates 21 jobs, raises user fees and institutes cutbacks in other areas to present a balanced budget plan in the new school year. The budget is $650,000 larger, but the staff reductions, including teaching jobs at the elementary level, middle school and high school, would amount to $773,000 in savings.
Superintendent of Schools Lisa Dana assured the committee and parents watching that while the cuts are significant, she is confident the town's quality of education will not suffer because of it. Committee members agreed with that assessment.
“We do consider the human toll. We don’t take this lightly. Our job sometimes is to make difficult decisions that people don’t want to hear,” Chairman Arthur Skarmeas said.
Colleague Eric Crane said the spending plan is the most reasonable budget the town can afford while maintaining a quality education.
“Hopefully this is the worst year, hopefully things are going to start turning around…but reality is reality,” said Skarmeas. He and his colleagues all bemoaned the state of the budget, dismal for a third straight year, but felt there was little they could do with state and local resources seemingly tapped out.
“We can’t just go to Town Meeting this year and say, ‘No, we need more,’” Jean McCartin said, noting federal and state aid is being cut on all fronts, along with other town resources being used up.
McCartin also pointed out that with the town carrying the financial load for the new high school project within the budget, rather than as long-term debt exclusion, it has eaten up any leeway the town may have had in absorbing financial hurdles, such as continual cuts in state and federal aid, skyrocketing health insurance costs and the like. Each year, the town is setting aside a portion of its free cash account to finance the high school renovations.
While committee members acknowledged the dismal financial picture, they also felt there’s nothing left to cut. McCartin called it a “barebones budget,” which she couldn’t foresee supporting during the next budget season.
“I don’t know where we go from here,” Connie Pawlak said. “We can’t keep doing this [cutting jobs, services, programs and giving wage freezes].”
A handful of parents spoke Monday night, calling on the committee to explore other alternatives to cutting jobs.
Keri Smith Holian, who is also a Town Meeting member, urged the committee to reject the proposed budget and questioned whether the schools could really offer a quality education with so many job cuts.
“It is in the best interest of all residents to find another way to pay for this,” she said. “Voting ‘no’ will send a message that [the town] shouldn’t balance the budget on the backs of kids.”
Dana expects the staff reductions will ultimately lead to 8-10 layoffs, once course scheduling is complete (likely at the end of this week) and retirements and other leaves of absence are accounted for, but she said it’s still too early to tell.
Nihan planning to stay on as consultant
One of the jobs to be cut is the director of K-12 health and physical education, which will be combined with the duties of the athletics director. The savings to the district is $67,584
Committee members had several concerns over that decision, but they were relieved to learn Monday night that retiring health director Gary Nihan will stay onboard with the DanversCARES project in particular, as a program manager/consultant post-retirement. Dana said the position would be covered under the two grants the district has that fund the initiative.
She said they are working out exact terms and language with Nihan now. Part of his continuing duties would be to help research grants for the program and other health-based initiatives.
“Hearing that Gary’s going to be around makes me feel a little better about this,” said Skarmeas.
Music program remains, teachers will be shared
As for elementary music programs, there is a reduction of .73 teachers, but that won’t mean students will lose out on the music portion of their education, Dana and Assistant Superintendent Susan Ambrozavitch assured the committee and parents. They emphasized that music will instead just be delivered in a different manner.
Teachers will be shared between schools, as art teachers are now, and there will be no music-specific planning time for teachers, rather they will have to collaborate more during general planning sessions with classroom teachers and other specialists.
Fees on the rise
Fees are going up, but the committee says they are still reasonable compared to most area districts. High school sports fees will increase up to $40 (some sports will cost $240); fine arts fees will increase by $6, elementary music $19 and middle school athletics from $77 to $95. Bus fees will rise $30 to $160 per student.
Supplies and other items will be trimmed back as well to meet the spending plan.
Opposition to the plan
The only proposed change to the plan came from Bill Bates, who continued to argue for freezing equity raises for principals and other administrators. He said the school leaders certainly deserved those raises, but he felt the $37,000 could be used to shore up other areas of the budget in greater need. No one else supported Bates in the motion, however.
The district has worked over the past several years to incrementally bring administrative salaries above maximum salaries for the district’s most senior teachers. For 2012, principals and others would receive about a $423 raise.
Pawlak lodged the lone “no” vote to accepting the transition plan for the high school administrative team, arguing the district should look to hire a new principal in 2012, rather than Ambrozavitch continuing to split duties for another year. The transition plan also affirms stipends for Ambrozavitch and other administrators at the high school, which are included in the new budget.
Admins: tuition for kindergarten not worth it
Dana also addressed a suggestion from special needs advocate Alan Vervaeke about charging tuition for the district’s all-day kindergarten program, estimating it could raise $250,000.
Dana, however, said charging tuition would forfeit the grant the schools receive and possibly jeopardize the progress on student development and readiness achieved over the past few years with the district-wide program. Currently, all students are enrolled in kindergarten and the program is self-supporting (except for the health insurance costs the town pays), but that likely wouldn’t be the case in a tuition-based program, as a certain number of families opt out.
Administrators calculated it would ultimately only amount to $57,000 for the district. For 2011, the district also received $184,303 in Chapter 70 aid for the 282 students enrolled in the program.
“I see it as putting a tax on parents,” Pawlak said.
Filling the gap
As for balancing this year’s budget, the School Committee also voted to use the remaining $150,137 in the education stabilization fund to close the gap. Finance Director Richard Warren informed the committee in February that spending was frozen on all non-salary accounts, as the district was facing a $515,000 deficit. In addition to the reserve funds and the spending freeze, the district will use a $150,000 federal jobs grant received last summer to plug the hole.
Alan Vervaeke
6:49 am on Tuesday, March 15, 2011
What a shame they still felt it was necessary to reduce staff. Cutting employees and raising fees is not the only way to balance a budget, and I hope that - eventually - parents of school children will start to see the damage that being short-sighted and stubborn will do to a school system.
Stephen Gilliss
8:07 am on Tuesday, March 15, 2011
I agree, Alan. If those teaching positions are not vital, then why were they created to begin with. Also, seems to me the assistant superintendent position could be eliminated as it cannot be any more important than the other teaching positions. Really, if we're expecting other teachers to do more with less, then I think the superintendent of schools (the highest paid official in Danvers?) should be able to do more with less as well.
Alan Vervaeke
9:52 am on Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Stephen - the Assistant Superintendant is actually a necessary position - even if she wasn't the High School principal as well. If we expected the Superintendent to do everything that both positions do, we'd have someeone burned out and probably suffering from health issues. The Assistant Super wears many hats and performs many functions.
The School Committee needs to find other sources of revenue (which I provided thoughts and recommendations for 2) and to also cut costs in places where we don't reduce the number of educators. Unfortunately, some places that could be cut (like after school clubs) would require parents to step up more and be responsible for their kids after school. Perhaps the school day should be modified to start an hour later across the board so kids get out of school later and are thus unsupercised for a shorter amount of time? Just a thought.
Stephen Gilliss
10:48 am on Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Alan, thanks for the clarification on the Asst Super role and responsibilities. Clearly, she is needed. Still, the essence behind my statement remains unchanged: if any teaching position is open for elimination, then one has to wonder if the position was needed to begin with. I suspect (on good faith) that in order to meet an optimal student:teacher ratio, all such positions are in fact needed. And if so, then why is job elimination even an option? Perhaps I could buy into the fact that smaller budgets leave us with no choice but to "do more with less", but I'm not convinced that our budgets are being managed properly. Without access to all the information, I can only 'guess' that management is an issue. And when services are consistently cut and taxes (plus other fees) continue rise, what else is the general public expected to surmise? The cost of electricity, water, excise and property taxes have gone up significantly year after year and yet services continue to get whacked. Why? I would love for someone to educate me on the matter as well as the long-term strategy for addressing unfunded liabilities, increasing public-sector health costs, etc. Where is the plan? Where is the data that supports our decisions and charts our future strategy?
Alan Vervaeke
11:20 am on Tuesday, March 15, 2011
This is why people need to go to School Committee meetings and ask questions. We are lucky in Danvers, in that building costs are NOT associated with the school district budget. They are part of the Town's costs, but I can assure you that costs are increasing as well. Electrical, water, sewer - aall outside the "school box".
As to student:teacher ratios - those numbers are well documented and average class size is also known as it is part of the teacher's contract.
Stephen Gilliss
11:12 am on Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Alan, your idea to start school later and end later is interesting. Any idea how much $$$ would be saved by eliminating such programs? My understanding behind the primary need for after-school programs is that they accommodate the schedules of working parents. As such, would starting and ending school later address this need? If so, how?
Alan Vervaeke
11:23 am on Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Stephen - don't think of just younger kids at the elementary level. Think of all the clubs in place for high schoolers and middle schoolers. There are a boatload. And since when has a school district been in the business of or has it been the priority of any school district to provide "child care" for working parents? It can offer programs for a fee to perform this service, but is it a requirement?
Stephen Gilliss
11:47 am on Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Before I say more, Alan, thanks for engaging. This isn't an optimal medium, of course, but for folks (like me) who can't attend most school and town meetings, an optional forum is welcomed.
I don't believe the school should provide "child care". As well, I think it is indeed reasonable to ask for a fee. And thus I wonder: What programs are we talking about eliminating and how much money (potentially) could be saved by eliminating them? If we were to charge for such activities, how much might we be able to charge?
Alan Vervaeke
12:01 pm on Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Stephen - my best suggestion is to get a copy of the School Budget for 2011/2012 school year. YOu should be able to ask the District offices to e-mail an electronic version to you. Just look at all of the clubs that are offered. Many include a stipend for the advisor, and also require a fee to be paid by the students who attend. As I mentioned, I don't know if all clubs stipends are supported fully by the fees paid to participate. If not, then some considerations should be made to eliminate it.
Stephen Gilliss
12:12 pm on Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Thanks, Alan. I've made the request for a copy of the school budget and anxiously await its arrival. I will follow up on our discussion once I've had a chance to review it. -- Cheers
Alan Vervaeke
2:26 pm on Thursday, March 24, 2011
Stephen - did you get your copy of the budget?
Ya know - I was thinking. The reason why Danvers High has the population it does - as compared to the Middle School - is because we lose a lot of kids to Bishop Fenwick and St. John's Prep after 8th grade. If people are so willing to pay that much money for high school, then why are we balking at charging for kindergarten? Look at St. Mary's - people pay to send their kids to GRADE SCHOOL! And they called it a "tax on parents"??? Have they seen how much they charge for bussing ???
Stephen Gilliss
11:19 am on Friday, March 25, 2011
Part 1 of a few due to Comment Field character limits.
Hey Alan,
I've indeed received a copy of the school budget and hope to give it a thorough review this weekend. Regarding your other comments, a few thoughts:
1) Do we indeed lose 'a lot' of kids to Bishop Fenwick and St. John's Prep? If so, how many? And how does this number compare (% wise) to the number who do not attend a private school? Not sure why this number even matters, but I’m guessing there is a tie to educational funding. Still, we’d need data to support this discussion.
2) As for busing, my wife and I began driving our kids to school last year as the fees were too high. They’ve been raised yet again -- now at $160 per child with no family maximum. I suspect busing fees will continue to rise till parents are funding transportation 100% out-of-pocket vs thru taxation. Don’t agree with this as busing has seemingly always been an acceptable portion of the school budget. Suddenly it’s not. Hmmm.
3) Regarding “P4K” (Pay For Kindergarten), it’s more than likely that the parents who could truly afford to P4K are also the same small % of parents who can afford to send their children to private school. The rest of us cannot.
Of course, if push came to shove I'm sure most if not all parents would find a way to pay out-of-pocket for busing and Kindergarten. But to me this isn't a question of whether we 'can'; rather, it’s a question of whether we 'should'.
Continued in Next Comment ...
Stephen Gilliss
11:26 am on Friday, March 25, 2011
Part 2 ...
We already pay for busing and Kindergarten via taxes so why should we pay for them again? Especially when you consider that seemingly each year property taxes and other (take your pick) fees rise. Yet, each year we seem to lose more and more services. So when does it end? After we start paying for busing? Kindergarten? Or perhaps after we concede to pay $300 for each trash barrel we place curbside? Or after each homeowner agrees to personally plow and sand the area of street in front of their home?
I'm being facetious, of course, but when does this madness end? And have we exhausted or at least considered all other possibilities?
Many folks in the private sector have taken pay cuts, surrendered benefits and/or lost overtime pay. Some have been asked to pay for a greater portion of their insurance, work longer hours or defer retirement. Have our public-sector counterparts at least been asked to do the same? What is the long-term impact of unfunded liabilities? Public health care costs are skyrocketing and are projected to keep doing so. Who -- I wonder -- is going to pay for that? What is the long-term plan?
I realize some folks like to think of the above issues as not relating to the education budget and thus don’t belong in this discussion. But I beg to differ. Our 2011/12 educational appropriation is approximately $32m. Why not $29m? Why can’t it be $33m or $38m for that matter?
Continued in Next Comment ...
Stephen Gilliss
11:28 am on Friday, March 25, 2011
Part 3 ...
Perhaps the reason it can’t be higher (for the sake of this discussion) is that there are other town appropriations that are too fat. And perhaps these appropriations need to be scrutinized more honestly, thoroughly and painfully than the school appropriation.
This is not to say that cuts can’t be made from the school budget. Indeed, there are “niceties” that were never part of the charter to educate our children. More simply, school is for learning not entertaining. Thus it seems reasonable that after-school programs, etc. be considered for elimination, productization or something betwixt. But also on the chopping block should be areas that ultimately impact our school budget appropriation. The one item that should not be on that list, however, is Kindergarten.
Alan Vervaeke
12:32 pm on Friday, March 25, 2011
I just typed in a massive response .... and it all disappeared.
Let's have coffee some day and discuss this.
Stephen Gilliss
12:36 pm on Friday, March 25, 2011
Ugh. I hate when that happens and it happens too often.
Anyway, coffee sounds great, Alan. Weekend morning, perhaps?
Alan Vervaeke
12:43 pm on Friday, March 25, 2011
Next weekend for sure.
BTW - which precinct are you in?
Stephen Gilliss
1:06 pm on Friday, March 25, 2011
Precinct 6.
Keith Lucy
3:22 pm on Friday, March 25, 2011
Alan - the reason for the current drop off between 8th grade enrollment and 9th grade enrollment is the fact that the current 8th grade class (and 7th grade class) are very large. The 6th grade class and below are closer to the district average of about 250. The number of kids that go from public 8th grade to private 9th is probably pretty close to the number of kids that go from private 8th grade to public 9th.
Alan Vervaeke
3:53 pm on Friday, March 25, 2011
But the stats have shown this as an issue for numerous years Keith. Perhaps last years drop-off was more significant, but the DESE data has shown a drop from 8th to 9th several years when I was doing research for my SC run and other research. The average loss is probably closer to 10-15% on an ongoing basis.