MINUTES OF BUDGET MEETING -
PRESENT: Chairperson Anne Larner, Vice-Chairperson Susan
Albright, Gail Glick, Patricia Kellogg, Marc Laredo, Nancy Levine, Leslie
Schneider, Dori Zaleznik, Mayor David Cohen
ABSENT: student representatives
OPEN SESSION
At
MOTION: It was
moved, by roll call vote, to convene in executive
session for the purpose of discussing matters related to
collective bargaining. If passed, the Committee will reconvene in open session
at
(
6 - 0 - 3
Absent for vote: Glick, Zaleznik
Absent
for executive session: Mayor Cohen
ROLL CALL VOTE BY WARD:
Ward I, absent for vote (Glick); Ward II, "yes" (Albright);
Ward III, "yes" (Larner); Ward IV, "yes" (Levine); Ward V,
"yes" (Kellogg); Ward VI, "yes" (Schneider); Ward VII,
"yes" (
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Anne Larner
called the meeting to order at
Superintendent Jeffrey
Young began the discussion by noting that three things have changed since the
presentation of the budget. The first is
an increase in health insurance costs ($448,000). The second is the recommendation to restore
the aides, teachers, and coordinator that were eliminated in the Governor's cut
of the kindergarten grant ($518,120).
The third is the reduction in funds from the Mayor as a result of loss
of State funding ($976,717).
The following are the
potential cuts to the budget:
Curtail
reserve funding ($800,000)
Add
a student parking fee at the high schools of $2/day ($54,000)
Complete
conversion to new telephone system ($35,280)
Reduce
Reduce
out-of-district placements ($120,000)
Reduce
enhanced longevity for current enrollment ($65,000)
Administrative
reorganization ($81,534)
Reduce
middle school assistant principals at Bigelow & Oak Hill ($120,000)
Reduce
high school library/media ($100,800)
Eliminate
Parents/Teachers Organization (PTO) creative arts ($24,870)
Reduce
custodians ($66,000)
Reduce
teaching positions ($1,081,407)
He gave a brief synopsis
on each item and paid particular attention to the last cut of teaching
positions. The current plan would call
for not touching K-2 at the elementary level, but this will mean four large
classes at the 4th grade at Bowen, 3rd grade at Cabot, 4th grade at
Lincoln-Eliot and 4th grade at Ward.
None will exceed 27. There will
be a reduction in the art, music, and physical education staff as they
correlate to the fewer classes. There will
be a reduction of six full-time equivalencies (FTEs) at the middle schools and
11 at the high schools. It has yet to be
determined how these will be spread among the buildings. Finally, there will be a savings of health
insurance that correlates with fewer staff ($139,500), but an increase in
unemployment ($198,400).
Marc Laredo asked if the
reduction of 24 FTEs in staff is actual layoffs.
Jeff Young replied that
they would not all be layoffs. Some
would be covered by attrition.
Marc Laredo believes they
may have overestimated the unemployment component. He also feels it is important to emphasize
that they are not talking about laying off 24 people,
rather not filling 24 positions.
Jeff Young stated that
during his budget presentation, he was quite certain there would be no layoffs
in the teaching force because attrition would cover the
reductions. He cannot
say that with certainty given the level of these cuts. They will revisit the unemployment component
for the next meeting.
Marc Laredo addressed the
kindergarten proposal. While he
understands that they are cutting the PIRP aide program earlier than planned,
as well as losing the kindergarten grant funding, he noted that $750,000 was
provided last year for literacy specialists.
He is struggling with restoring half a million dollars to an area that
has already received a large amount of funding, when they are faced with
increased class sizes. He would prefer
the money be put to that use instead.
Jeff Young replied that he
agrees with Marc on the importance of class size. However, equally important is their concern
for the youngest at-risk readers, who will no longer have the safety net of the
Primary Intervention Reading Program (PIRP).
The kindergarten aides were an important component of the
transition. The double loss will put
these children at great risk, which troubles him even more than the class size
issue.
Susan Albright asked if
they had included
Jeff Young replied that
the proposal is for an estimated 150 spaces in the parking lot and does not
include
Susan Albright expressed
concern about additional parking on the streets as a result of this
recommendation.
Marc Laredo suggested they
investigate charging for the privilege of parking on
Jeff Young noted that they
will be discussing the proposal with the police department.
Mayor Cohen added that
public ways require certain regulations.
Charging for parking on
Anne Larner added that
most of the streets around the high school have restricted parking for a set
number of hours and tickets are issued for infractions. This would not be the case in the parking
lot.
Mayor Cohen asked how they
would envision collecting the parking fees.
Jeff Young replied that it
would most likely be done on a semester basis, but the logistics have yet to be
determined.
Susan Albright asked if
there had been discussions with the PTO Council regarding the elimination of
the creative arts position. At one
point, this was funded by PTO dues, but was a large burden on their budget.
Jeff Young responded that
he will be speaking with the PTO Council about this recommendation.
Gail Glick asked if they
had anything firm with regard to the Circuit Breaker legislation, which has to
do with how communities are reimbursed for out-of-district placements and which
provides reimbursement for students who receive
extensive services in school.
Carol Daynard, Assistant
Superintendent for Pupil Services, stated that they do not have a firm
commitment in this area. If the current
funding process remains in place, she is comfortable with the $120,000
reduction, but this will not be the case if the Circuit Breaker legislation
passes.
Anne Larner noted that
this legislation has been in and out of budgets over the past few years.
Dori Zaleznik asked how
much of the cut list is secure vs. projected and if they had a cushion in which
to work with if they decide to make some changes.
Jeff Young believes the
list is fairly secure, although there appears to be some uncertainty around the
area of the Circuit Breaker legislation.
Mayor Cohen noted that the
Chairman of the House Ways & Means Committee has repeatedly stated that
communities should be prepared for a 10-20% reduction in local aid. The Governor's budget called for a 5%
reduction, which translated to 17% for
Anne Larner recalls a
difficult year in the early 1990s when there were cuts in local aid as late as
August and the Mayor had to reduce funding to the schools in September.
Nancy Levine expressed
concern about cuts in the number of custodians, which could result in increased
overtime.
Jeff Young agreed that
they are stretching the work force.
However, there are administrative steps being taken to better control
this area, so it is their hope that this impact may not be as severe as it
appears on the surface.
Michael Cronin, Chief of
Operations, added that they have done a lot of work this past year in the area
of staffing and overtime and have been able to reduce some of the
problems. They are working with the City
on training staff in a new safety
program, which should help reduce the number of injuries
that result in absenteeism and overtime costs.
Patty Kellogg asked about
the impact of the library cut at the high schools.
Jeff Young stated that
this cut would mean less library media specialist time during the school day to
work with students on things such as research methodology. This will not reduce the number of hours that
the libraries are open.
At
this point, the Superintendent moved on to the discussion of the administrative
reorganization plan at the
Human Resources services 21 schools, the
Business, Finance &
Planning handles all of the financial functions -- accounting, payroll,
purchasing, etc. The goal in this area
is for improved supervision of these services, so that the Assistant
Superintendent can function like a chief financial officer and be more involved
in strategic planning and forecasting.
One of the ways they envision improvement is through the use of enhanced
technology for
the collection, management, and analysis of data,
which can then be shared and better utilized at the school level. The reduction in this department is $108,140.
Curriculum &
Instruction has seen an increase in the amount of reporting necessary as a
result of State mandates around Education Reform, the Massachusetts
Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) exam, and the No Child Left Behind
legislation. In addition, there is a
need to consolidate supervision and support functions. The reduction in this department is $248,631.
Pupil Services is an area
with the broadest responsibilities, i.e., special education, English Language
Learners (ELL), health education, out-of-district placements, tuition programs
and guidance. The data collection and
management has become massive and needs to be analyzed and utilized in a better
way. The reorganization will consolidate
staffing to allow for better communication among the various departments that
fall under this area. The reduction in
this department is $81,250.
Operations & Planning
has a smaller dollar savings in comparison with the other offices, but large
gains. Their goal is for new guidelines
and procedures for plant operations and maintenance, with a web-based real time
work order system. One area that they
have held sacred is the gains that have been made in charter maintenance with
the Override funding. Their focus is
going to be on preventative vs. reactive maintenance. The reduction in this department is $19,750.
The
Superintendent/Secondary Education office will realize a savings of $111,500,
by not refilling one of the Assistant Superintendent positions and reducing a
secretary to part-time. This will mean an increased workload for the rest of
the central office positions and staff.
Information Technology
goals are to improve network administration, particularly as the new systems go
on line at the high schools and more people are using technology. The reduction in this department is $60,744.
Marc Laredo thanked the
Superintendent for this initiative, which involves painfully eliminating
people, but which should eventually improve administrative efforts. He hopes they will continue to make this an
ongoing process rather than a one-time approach. Given the magnitude of cuts they are facing
systemwide, he wondered if they could go even deeper in this area, especially
considering that half of the positions on this list were already vacant this
year.
Jeff Young explained that
this plan is the product of five months of thought and discussion. It is important to make the distinction
between the goal of improving services vs. simply
slashing positions. It is certainly the
privy of the Committee to
change this approach, but it would not serve the
objectives with which they set out to accomplish.
Susan Albright feels as if
they are slashing staffing at the schools and would like to explore other
possibilities.
Anne Larner stated that
she does not believe the administration has been top heavy. To the contrary, there have been numerous
cuts in middle management over the years that have resulted in somewhat of a
dysfunctional system. This
reorganization attempts to address those issues.
Leslie Schneider would
appreciate more information around the responsibilities associated with the
individuals in the
Marc Laredo asked about
the increase from FY02 to FY03 in the coordinator line item.
Sandy Guryan explained
that there was an increase in the mentor and instructional technology
coordinators' time that she will detail in a memo.
Carolyn Wyatt added that
there has been an effort over the past few years to rebuild these areas, in
order to address mandates around aligning curriculum, standards-based
education, and MCAS.
Marc Laredo would appreciate
the detail around the history of these positions, which will help put this into
context in their decision-making process.
Anne Larner commented that
there is a great deal of history to be digested in a short timeframe, which is
going to be difficult.
Dori Zaleznik stated that
this plan was well-developed in response to the Budget Guidelines. If the Committee would prefer to change some
of the recommended cuts, she would caution that rather than targeting specific
areas, they leave that decision to the Superintendent. There is a limited amount of time for the
administration to pull together the kind of information that people
desire. Rather than micromanaging, she
would prefer to leave the particulars to the administration, while the
Committee continues to learn more about staffing and programs throughout the
year.
Leslie Schneider does not
want to micromanage, but cannot make good decisions about tradeoffs without
understanding the thinking behind the decisions.
Gail Glick commented that
they need to have a level of trust in the people who are preparing the
information and making recommendations.
They are the ones who
work in the buildings on a daily basis and have a
greater understanding of the system.
Susan Albright stated that
whatever the approach, it inevitably comes down to tradeoffs.
Gail Glick agreed but
feels that the proposal needs to come from the same source that provides the
recommendations.
Nancy Levine believes that
the Superintendent and staff are the best sources for determining tradeoffs
that will leave them with decisions that are balanced systemwide.
Anne Larner agreed but
understands that Committee members have different backgrounds and length of
time in service. Whatever information
that can be provided in a timely fashion and that will assist in bringing
people up to speed would be helpful.
Jeff Young next talked
about the recommendation to institute transportation fees. While this was not an easy decision, he felt
it would be irresponsible not to bring forward the proposal for consideration
given the economic times. This model
would require families to pay 1/3 of the cost of transportation, for which the
school system currently assumes full responsibility. It is their intention to do outreach to the
community to identify people who may need waivers. They will also have to develop a policy
around family caps. While they have not
refined the payment system, they could adopt an installment plan for some
families to make payment easier. The
contract with the transportation company would allow them to reduce the number
of buses deployed, if it is determined that the policy results in a drop in
ridership.
Marc Laredo asked about
the number of students who currently ride buses.
Sandy Guryan replied that
total ridership includes approximately 2,800 public and 400 private school
students. Nine-hundred of these students
live closer than the system's policy around distance, but are eligible because
they are in the various safety zones or particular circumstances that have been
approved by past school committees. Only
586 students are mandated to be bused by state law because they are in grades
K-6 and live more than two miles from school.
Marc Laredo noted that
this means that half the population of students who are bused are either
mandated or in a safety zone.
Sandy Guryan replied in
the affirmative. The recommendation
calls for charging fees to anyone not legally required to be bused. In addition, if seats are available, they
could allow those living closer to the school the opportunity to ride the
bus. However, this would have to be on a
space-available basis.
Nancy Levine wondered if
they could develop a ticket based process, similar to what was once offered in
the past, where any student could board a bus if there were room despite the
distance from the school. This could
serve the dual purpose of eliminating some of the congestion around the
schools, as well as provide a measure of safety for students who currently walk
during inclement weather.
Sandy Guryan cannot
respond to this question at this point, but it is something they are
exploring. The more
flexible the arrangements that can be made the better. A key component will be getting information
to parents in a timely fashion, so that the system can determine the number of
riders and make appropriate plans. At
that point, they will have a better idea of whether or not
there are available seats. The process really needs to occur in an
orderly and sequential fashion.
Dori Zaleznik asked if
they could develop a few hypothetical situations that would allow them to see
various financial scenarios. She
provided some examples, such as an estimate of number of families who would
receive waivers, various scenarios of caps, etc. She would also like to investigate the impact
of waivers for the Williams community and very heavily congested traffic areas.
Marc Laredo asked if
special education transportation is part of the fee recommendation.
Sandy Guryan does not
believe that they can legally charge fees in this area.
At this point, the
Committee returned to the individual areas of responsibility in the budget
book, for further questions/review.
Leslie Schneider asked
about substitute teachers at the high schools.
Roberta Dollase, Assistant
Superintendent for Human Resources, talked about the instructional support
staff (ISS) that are utilized for this purpose and who are in the buildings on
a regular basis. One of the benefits of
this program is that the people get to know the schools, teachers, and students
and can do a more effective job substituting.
On days when there are multiple absences due to illness or a
professional development conference, coverage can be difficult and the need for
hiring outside substitutes becomes necessary.
However, finding people interested in doing this work is becoming
increasingly scarce. In order to cover
every class at all times, they would have to double or triple the ISS program,
which would be very costly.
Susan Albright noted that
because they are not able to cover all classes, they often become study halls
rather than effective learning environments.
Anne Larner asked about
the food services proposal.
Jeff Young stated that the
system is considering contracting out the food services operations and is in
the process of developing a Request for Proposal (RFP). The RFP will reserve the School Committee's
right to reject any/all bids and will also indicate that they are not obligated
to award a contract pursuant to the RFP, but can maintain the current method of
providing services, if they so desire.
They will fulfill their obligation to bargain on an expedited basis once
they are allowed to do so by the Labor Relations Commission, who will certify
one union as the exclusive representative.
A formal vote is requested of the School Committee in order to move
forward.
MOTION: It was moved to direct counsel to encourage
the
Labor
Relation's Commission to expedite any
necessary litigation about the contours of the
bargaining units involved in Food Services.
(Glick
- Zaleznik)
unanimous
At this point, the
Committee commenced with discussion around the process for next week's straw
vote on the budget.
Several members expressed
an interest in postponing the straw vote given the volume of material received
and the short timeframe for review. The
original budget calendar included an extra day, if needed, which would move
everything back a week. Discussion was
had around the impact on the public hearing, which has been on people's
schedules, and the statutes regarding the budget process timeline.
Susan Albright expressed
concern that she would not be available for the final vote if the schedule were
changed.
MOTION: It was
moved to move the straw vote from
to
(Levine
- Glick)
Discussion:
Marc Laredo stated that
while he would prefer to have some additional time to reflect on the
information, he is more concerned about the absence of a Committee member for
the final vote.
Dori Zaleznik wondered if
they could defer this vote until Monday, when they have a better sense of how
the discussion is going. It is possible
they could hold the straw vote at the end of the meeting.
Anne Larner noted that the
downside to this suggestion is insufficient notification to the public.
Nancy Levine stated that
the straw vote is critical. Hearing new
proposals on the same evening as having to vote can be problematic, as it does
not give members time to reflect.
Vote on motion to postpone
straw vote: 2 - 6 - 1
In
favor: Glick,
Levine
Opposed: Albright,
Kellogg,
Larner,
Schneider, Zaleznik
Absent
for vote: Mayor Cohen
MOTION
FAILS
At
this point, Committee members gave a sense of the issues they are still
struggling with, as well as some idea of the direction in which they are
heading in certain areas.
Dori
Zaleznik is in favor of a number of the initiatives put forth in this budget,
but is having the most difficulty with the transportation fee. While she understands it will generate needed
revenue, she wants to be sure that it is as fair as possible. However, at some point it might not be worth
the administrative effort if the revenue generated is small. She does not believe she has enough
information yet on this subject to make a decision. She would also like to focus on the classroom
experience and, to the extent possible, not have to cut teachers.
Marc
Laredo stated that his initial feelings are against supporting a transportation
fee for philosophical reasons. As a
result of redistricting and other busing policies, the system has made
decisions about where children will go to school and who will be bused. To now force families to pay for that service
sends the wrong message and may discourage people from using buses and only exacerbate
traffic problems at the schools. Another
area of concern is technology, where he believes more funding is
necessary. He also differs with the
recommendation to restore the kindergarten aides, but would be willing to
discuss a model that provides some form of aides in the classroom at a reduced
level. He would like to see if any
further cuts can be taken from the administration.
Leslie
Schneider would support the transportation fee, but has concerns about the
restoration of the aides. She is troubled
by the cuts at the secondary level, particularly at the high schools. She would also like to maintain guidance
counselor ratios.
Susan
Albright is not concerned about a transportation fee, but would like to hear
more about the implementation process.
She has reservations about the loss of the creative arts position, as
that would be a great burden on the PTOs in picking up that
funding. In terms of the kindergarten aides, she might
be agreeable to some restoration, but would prefer it be partial and use the
balance elsewhere. Finally, she is very
worried about the cuts at the secondary level and would like the Superintendent
to prepare some other proposals.
Patty
Kellogg has not made up her mind on the transportation fee, but definitely
supports the recommendation to restore the kindergarten aides. Losing both those and the PIRP positions
would be detrimental. The support for
students at this stage of their development can have a lifelong impact on
learning. She shares concern
about
the guidance counselor ratios and increased workload, particularly at
Nancy
Levine favors the restoration of the kindergarten aides because it would
devastate the literacy program to pull out all supports and undermine the
investment they have already made. In
general, she supports a transportation fee, because it is not something that is
directly linked to the classroom. If
cuts have to be made, these are the types of areas she would choose. If they are going to look at the possibility
of mitigation/waivers, she would prefer it be on a distance basis and with a
citywide perspective. While she agrees
that the high school guidance counselors are overloaded, the current ratio is
170:1 and the numbers are already somewhat higher. She does not believe the 180:1 is going to
make all that much of a difference, if they can be assured that the numbers
will not creep up beyond that point. She
is not certain she would change the recommendation for cutting teaching staff
until she sees what the tradeoffs would be, because she is not sure that the
alternatives are any better.
Gail
Glick is pleased with the overall job of the Superintendent and staff in
developing a budget that preserves the system as a whole, while making some
difficult choices about reductions. Her
priority has always been to maintain teaching staff, as much as possible and
she would include guidance in that goal.
She supports preserving class size and the literacy initiative, in
whatever personnel method is deemed best.
While she is not opposed to instituting a transportation fee, she wants
it to be done in a very comprehensive manner.
This is a good opportunity to review the history around past policies
with a fresh eye and try to understand some of the decisions they have inherited.
Anne
Larner strongly supports the proposed administrative reorganization, as
proposed. The plan is well crafted and
she would not want to tinker with the process.
She would like to mitigate some of the secondary staffing cuts with
whatever flexibility might remain. While
she would be open to some discussion about the deployment of kindergarten
aides, in general she supports the restoration of these positions because there
is a need for support for the literacy initiative that must be sustained. She is not opposed to instituting a bus fee
and would not be inclined to support waivers other than for financial need.
Marc
Laredo asked for further clarification on the $300,00
for the professional development day.
Jeff
Young explained that professional development has two components. One is the cost of the program itself and the
other is the piece that relates to the additional time that was agreed upon
through bargaining.
Sandy
Guryan added that the $300,000 is the cost for the additional extra day of
teacher time for the professional workshop day.
Many communities offer a similar
program. Because this was the first year of the
implementation of this program, there is a substantial jump in this account.
Jeff
Young emphasized the importance of restoring the staffing for the literacy
initiative because this will support the most at-risk students at a very young
age. The Committee has already invested
funding for this program and he would ask them to think twice about abandoning
this support. Since the total amount of
reductions on the list total $2,500,000, but the amount really required is only
$1,942,837, he would recommend they take the difference and apply that to the
teacher reduction to get back approximately 60% of that staffing.
ADJOURNMENT
The
meeting was adjourned at