A friendly reminder that tonight's BOE Finance Committee meeting is 7:30pm at Dodd Middle School. This meeting is a Public Informational Meeting/Board Members response to the Superintendent's Budget recommendation.
Public comments are welcome and encouraged.
The BOE Finance Committee will vote on a budget to move forward to the full BOE for it's Thurs business meeting.
119 comments:
Tony,
I am hoping that some light can be shed on the town reimbursement (or lack thereof) for special ed expenses over the last few years. Do they plan on returning that money to the Board? Thanks.
4:38, early in December the BOE requested a meeting with the TC Finance committee to discuss the special education shortfall. We're waiting for the topic to be placed on their agenda.
The BOE has not formally requested any additional funds from the TC at this time. My goal is to work on this with the TC because it's not just a 1 year problem. I think we're going to see decreasing special ed reimbursements from Hartford over the next 2 years.
We should hear about what the state reimbursement will be to Cheshire late in February. Once we have the number we can use it as input for the discussion.
We may have a resolution to this until spring.
Thanks for advancing the superintendent's budget forward to the full BOE.
"Thanks for advancing the superintendent's budget forward to the full BOE."
It's not over by any means. As I stated last night, I do not expect this, or any, TC to give us a $3M increase. The Finance and Planning committees will continue meeting through May to tailor options on areas of reductions to accomodate whatever comes back from the TC.
The options, some of which I outlined in another thread here, requires in depth analysis.
The areas that the finance committee will be studying are:
- Participation Fees, Parking Fees
- Extra-curricular cost analysis
- Costs of consolidating a school and costs for relocating/building out existing schools to accomodate the displaced students (<- Remember, Dr. Florio stated that a $1.5M reduction would require the closure of a school). Whether it can be done is doubtful but I'd rather have the facts.
I expect that the Planning/Curriculum committees will look at class room size and my idea about teaching assistants to help with larger class sizes.
The reality is that this budget is far from over folks. Had the above topics been studied and data made available to the finance committee, I would've supported some level of reduction that does not severely impact our school district. But as I stated last night, we need to be precise with our recommendations.
I'll post details about last night's meeting and the reports I received on extra-curricular costs and stipends seperately.
And...if it isn't obvious I'll say it again: There's only one place where we may be able to find a silver bullet and that's concessions from the teacher's union.
Is the teacher's union willing to help out the school district? We've hit every other area in the budget in some shape/form last year with reductions. IAT's, Custodians, Administrators...have all come to the table to negotiate 0% - < 2% raises.
Only the teacher's union is left and that expense is the bulk of the budget increase.
I had the opportunity to speak with a few residents after the meeting, including 2 teachers, and they indicated that the union SHOULD be helping if it will save jobs.
So...is the union leadership listening?
You hit the nail on the head. The bulk of the increase is salaries and the union leadership should allow for concessions. You even had some teachers saying the same. The TC will make reductions and everyone will give them a hard time rather than directing their anger towards the unions who could, if they chose to, help out the situation.
In talking with many teachers, there is interest in working with the town, but only with fair process in place. The groups that Tony refers to (IAT's, Custodians, Administrators) all negotiated new contracts. The teachers will be starting this process in the summer and I would guess that they would be willing at that time. Dr. Florio hinted at this a few times in his budget presentation and stated the importance of just getting through this year.
My husband is in a union..he has a contract too. But it didn't stop his employer, P & W, from giving everyone five furlough days (hourly and salary people). Is that fair? There was no choice in the matter. Is is too much to ask the teachers union to give up something here and now?? I don't think so. Just do it and get over it.
3:56
If Union leadership really gives a hoot about the kids, their members and next years contract negotiations why should they wait? Whose interest is served? No one from where I sit unless the leaders are simply relying on their tenure, their pride and relaxing. Yes they'll have their jobs and the little extra they get representing their bargaining unit but this business of not even considering an offer now is really incredibly selfish.
They are counting on caring parents who genuinely remain concerned about the educational welfare of their children to stick up for them. There may be no knights on white horses marching in this year but the teachers could do the town and their kids a great service by compelling their leaders to make a real offer to halve that salary increase.
As taxpayers write out their tax check this year it may be more than last year. Ask your self...is that increase for my little boy or girl or was it just to cover a salary increase for their teacher, which by all stats I've seen, has no basis on the pay increase mom and dad got. And Grandma and grandpa got zilch.
Parents, pick up a newspaper. Read whats going on all around you. The state is broke, the federal gov't is broke. CT has 9% unemployment and thats all in the private sector. Cheshire is not an island. We're no different than anywhere else. Money is very tight for everybody. Focus on the total not the increase...Our schools will have at least 60 million this year educating 100 fewer kids... and that's not small change.
TPS
A teacher making $70K at the start of the current contract now earns over $79K. How many of you (non Cheshire teachers) have had a salary increase of 13.2% over the last 3 years? Teachers from surrounding towns can't believe the raises that Cheshire teachers are getting. Since the contract was signed, there has been no other agreement in the State that even approaches the increases in Cheshire. The teachers contract is the single greatest factor that is suffocating education in Cheshire.
4:20 here again. When P & W made everyone take the 5 furlough days, guess what, they didn't promise no layoffs. I'm sure the furlough days helped reduce layoffs, so at least my husband helped save someone's job.
We consider ourselves extremely lucky. Why? Because he still has a job!!
"If Union leadership really gives a hoot about the kids, their members and next years contract negotiations why should they wait?"
It is called "impasse resolution". It means that the teachers in Cheshire must be able to trust the other parties including members of the town council not to screw them over in the process.
These members of the town council include Mr. TPS who says things like,
"Good luck BOE. Educating our kids is your highest priority. After that its a bit muddy. Fewer dollars should be very clarifying."
Clearly, educating the kids of Cheshire is not HIS priority. It seems that he is more interested in bullying techniques than working together.
Tony,
I appreciate that you supported the budget. I know that it is a long road ahead, but just the same, thank you!.
"The bulk of the increase is salaries"
Isn't this what they said about the HUGE increases for the last 2 years?
2008-2009 $27,628,012
2009-2010 $27,546,647
2010-2011 $27,646,762
I am missing something here.
TPS says to focus on the total. If 8:10 is correct, the total for teacher salaries for the past 3 years has been the same at $27 million? Where is the money going?
Also, my son goes to school to spent the day with his TEACHER. If the total budget is over 60 million and 27 of that is for teachers, what on earth is the rest being spent on?
"It means that the teachers in Cheshire must be able to trust the other parties including members of the town council not to screw them over in the process."
So you're saying the teachers aren't budging because they want to be promised no layoffs or maybe if they give up some of their raise they'll want it paid back at a later date?? How can a town promise anything like that? They don't even have the final numbers from Hartford for what they'll get. The State has something like a 3.5 billion $ deficit.
Get real. Why is it that other union workers, like those at P & W, don't make the same demands? Probably because they're aware of the how bad things are.
What makes the teachers union any different than any other union? Do they think they're better?
Don't turn this on the TC. Just work out a compromise and move on.
"Also, my son goes to school to spent the day with his TEACHER. If the total budget is over 60 million and 27 of that is for teachers, what on earth is the rest being spent on?"
Insurance, transportation, and utiiities. Don't forget special ed (which is mandated). Of course when the town gets reimbursed for those expenses from the state, does the TC give it back to the BOE? No, they put it in the rainy day fund. The teachers are to blame for that? Yeah right.
8:10 & 8:26
Nice try using the fancy math to make it look like there isn't that much of an increase.
According to CT Dept. of Education, Cheshire Public Schools enrollment has dropped by 164 students. St. Bridget's and Cheshire Academy's enrollments in thise same 3 years have increased by 64 students. That says something about Cheshire's FINE education system when in a down economy, parents are spending more money to send their children to these private and semi-private schools.
When Cheshire loses 164 students in a 3 year period, then there should be a decrease in the number of teachers. However, as you can see, we continue to pay more.
Why?
It is time for people to open their eyes and see that although people may move into this town for the schools, once they are in, they find they aren't what they are cracked up to be.
DOes this mean we need to spend more money? Or does it mean we need better leadership from the top to the bottom. Do we need to make sure that our teachers, who are all being well paid, are doing their jobs and educating our shildren up to the standards we expect?
Why are we losing students, in difficult economic times, to the private schools in town?
We need answers before we can dump more money into a ship that has many leaks.
The key issue is priorities. Where should our tax money go? Which is more important? THe rainy day fund or education? I'm not for spending all of the rainy day fund, but some of it could help the BOE get through this year. Next year will be a new contract. Blaming the teachers for a contract negotiated 3 years ago is not productive. Statements by some of the current TC are not helping matters. They seem to have no clue as to what is important to the town.
I disagree with you 11:11.
I believe the TC knows exactly what this town wants.
Many of us have all taken pay cuts over the past 3 years while the teacher's salaries continue to increase. Granted, a previous BOE and TC allowed that to happen, but they should also look at the severity of this budget problem and offer a give back.
You shouldn't be taking the "rainy day" fund (too bad they gave it that nickname, it sounds like it is money just to play with)and using it to cover shotages in a budget. It is meant to be used for town emergencies and unforseen expenses. For example, the amount of money we have to pay for the snow removal has probably blown that budget out. That was not expected, yet we need to pay for it.
WHat happens when the rainy day fund is exhasted and we have a budget shortge? Or unexpected expenditures? What do we do then? Call Obama and ask for a bail out?
That doesn't work!
This TC is fully aware of what this town wants and needs and won't let there arms get twisted by a small amount of parents who feel we should keep dumping money into a school system that needs a complete overhaul.
"According to CT Dept. of Education, Cheshire Public Schools enrollment has dropped by 164 students. St. Bridget's and Cheshire Academy's enrollments in thise same 3 years have increased by 64 students. That says something about Cheshire's FINE education system when in a down economy, parents are spending more money to send their children to these private and semi-private schools."
You are talking about the elementary schools. Maybe people are ticked off by the overcrowding forced by the TC cuts of the BOE budget. Also there are less young kids starting school. Maybe less families moving to town because the TC does not support education.
"This TC is fully aware of what this town wants and needs and won't let there arms get twisted by a small amount of parents who feel we should keep dumping money into a school system that needs a complete overhaul."
WRONG. It's a large amount of parents, grandparents, and reasonable people who value education. The small number is people who think the rainy day fund is only for some natural disaster.
Tony: It is unfortunate that you have to deal with the inevitability that the current TC will cut whatever budget you put forward. As you go forward please make academics the highest priority as you consider cuts. Cutting teachers or courses will have the biggest detrimental effect on students. While I think extracurricular activities are important, if the TC forces you into making more cuts, people will just have to get more creative for fundraising as the turf field crowd did recently.
11:37
Where are all of them then?
Just like there was a large amount of people who wanted the permanent roof over the pool, yet it was voted down 2-1.
200 people, maybe, showed up last year at the budget hearings. Looked like a lot, but the room doesn't hold that many. Out of nearly 5000 students, I would have expected more parents to get involved.
I believe there are more parents like me (yes I have shildren in the school system) who are fed up with how the schools are being run and how many of the teachers are just going through the paces until they can retire. I won't lump them all into that group, because there are some good ones, but there shouldn't be any teaching our children if they don't have a love for it anymore.
Why don't you rally your "many" parents together and lets see how many there really are who want us to continue to dump more money into a system that needs work.
Tell me, where do we get the money to cover the extra snow plowing costs that we will incur this winter?
You are typical of the credit happy people that this country is developing. We can charge it and worry about paying it later. Oh look we have extra cash in our savings account, lets spend it.
That is what is worong with many people today. They don't plan for unexpected expenditures and when something happens, they go into debt.
I say, tighten your belt, fix the problems at hand and things will get better.
You sound like the same type of person who back Obama's bailouts. How did that work out?
"200 people, maybe, showed up last year at the budget hearings. Looked like a lot, but the room doesn't hold that many. Out of nearly 5000 students, I would have expected more parents to get involved."
How many showed up to support the R's budget? A few. Oh, they must be the "silent" majority.
" how many of the teachers are just going through the paces until they can retire. I won't lump them all into that group, because there are some good ones, but there shouldn't be any teaching our children if they don't have a love for it anymore."
Yes, there are some bad ones who are just "hanging on" to collect a full pension. Whoever designed the pension system to encourage teachers to wait 35 yrs for a full pension was crazy. However, you want to punish the good teachers because of the bad ones? When there are layoffs the schools lose some good young teachers, the "hangers" remain. Why not just give the long timers a retirement package. Even if the savings aren't great, we at least get them out of the classroom.
"You sound like the same type of person who back Obama's bailouts. How did that work out?"
I was not a fan of the bailouts because the money went to the same greedy banks that sold phony loans to desperate people. You sound like one of those morons who backed the Bush taxcuts for the wealthy because it would "create jobs". How did that work out? It didn't create jobs it just drove up the national debt.
Budget 2010/11
Certified salaries 31,321,683
Non-cert salaries $7,332,197
Empl. Benefits $9,456,118
Personnel total $48,109,998
Instruct. expense $3,517,752
Support Servs. $$5,267,200
Maint. & Oper. $3,482,925
Total $60,377,875
That's last year (the one we're in now)79% of the ed. budget is personnel related. Yes...education is about teachers, admin & support but for those of you asking where it all is spent there it is.
The teacher's union has made NO offers to the town...only a few suggestions. I would not expect much more at this point but if the BOE is lacking the intestinal fortitude to reduce the requested increase there will be a reduction forthcoming from the Town Council. The BOE expects this and is preparing. I would prefer to see them make some of the hard choices now. Dr. Florio has laid out some scenarios so no one is blind to the "challenges" to be faced.
Elected officials represent all taxpayers not special interest groups and bargaining units. This includes the BOE.
Tim Slocum
Both of my children went to the Cheshire schools, got accepted to very competitive colleges and have been successful there. That is a typical scenario here, but not so much in our neighboring towns. If we want to preserve our education system we need to support Dr. Florio's budget. There are some pompous and short sighted TC members who think that they represent the majority of the town. They only represent a small group of dreamers who think that property taxes should never increase even though costs of everything are rising.
"if the BOE is lacking the intestinal fortitude to reduce the requested increase there will be a reduction forthcoming from the Town Council."
Here is proof that the decision is already made. Mr. TPS (Tim Slocum) has no appreciation for education. Now he is even bullying the BOE. Too bad that more time isn't spent building relationships and trust instead of bashing every group that crosses his preconceived agenda. His mind is clearly already made up.
-Jed
I moved here before the town pool was a bad investment waiting to happen. I have seen the ups and downs of the budget and many town councils come and go. This is by far the worst council I have seen. They are doing a disservice to the town. They will drive families away. The families support our small businesses in town who also pay taxes. What happens to our tax base when they have to close? Don't listen to the people who complain that they have to pay taxes to educate other peoples' children. They are dead wrong.
"The teacher's union has made NO offers to the town"
Actually that is incorrect. If you will look at slide number 27 of Dr. Florio's presentation, you will see that 155 teachers switched to an alternate health plan to save the town money.
How right you are Jed. I saw Mr. Slocum on public access at the BOE meeting. He was trying to suggest that Dr. Florio's budget was inflated because we "might" receive funds back from the state for special ed reimbursement. By same token he brushed aside the fact that the TC never gave the BOE $0.5 million in funds from the state. He claims it's all town money anyway. It's clear what his agenda is and it stinks. We need to vote him OUT.
Is there a way to impeach members of the TC or remove them from office? Any lawyers who can interpret the charter? If there isn't there certinly should be.
"Elected officials represent all taxpayers not special interest groups and bargaining units. This includes the BOE." Tim Slocum
Is he deluded or what? Have you seen the throngs of his supporters at the BOE or TC meetings. Oh you missed that? Apparently they are figments of his imagination. Perhaps he is the one who represents a small interest group.
Anyone know what the average tax increase would be if the town and boe budgets get approved as is? I think that's something many people would like to know especially before they say let's give the super whatever he wants and the TM too.
"Actually that is incorrect. If you will look at slide number 27 of Dr. Florio's presentation, you will see that 155 teachers switched to an alternate health plan to save the town money."
The BOE put into the HSA plan, not the union. It's an option, yet another one, for the union membership to utilize as way to save on health care. It's in way, shape or form an offer or concession. It's Vincent Mascianna trying to help the town, and healthcare plan participants, to save money.
Whether or not the plan works is still up in the air.
"
Isn't this what they said about the HUGE increases for the last 2 years?
2008-2009 $27,628,012
2009-2010 $27,546,647
2010-2011 $27,646,762"
I covered this phenonemon in another post about the budget. The salary account is understated due to credits from ARRA and Federal Teacher's Stimulus funds. Dr. Florio applies grants towards the accounts and the grants are reflected in the bottom line. The reality is that salaries are going up 14% according to the contract schedule.
In the future, I will be asking Dr. Florio to break out each account to show actual costs BEFORE grants are applied.
"Also, my son goes to school to spent the day with his TEACHER. If the total budget is over 60 million and 27 of that is for teachers, what on earth is the rest being spent on?"
I spent a great deal of time detailing the budget here. Check the home page, there are links for each part of the budget. The information you seek is there.
"When Cheshire loses 164 students in a 3 year period, then there should be a decrease in the number of teachers. However, as you can see, we continue to pay more.
Why?"
There's been a decrease of 30 teachers over the last two years. 30 positions eliminated. Using the administration's preferred class size of 20, only 8.5 should've been eliminated. In that sense, the number of teaching position loses outpaces declining enrollment.
Regarding Mr. Slocum's Statement below:
" I would not expect much more at this point but if the BOE is lacking the intestinal fortitude to reduce the requested increase there will be a reduction forthcoming from the Town Council. The BOE expects this and is preparing. I would prefer to see them make some of the hard choices now. Dr. Florio has laid out some scenarios so no one is blind to the "challenges" to be faced."
It's unfortunate that Mr. Slocum has decided to attack the BOE. As recently as yesterday, I spoke with Mr. Slocum on the phone and explained to him the difficulty I was having in defining reductions and the limitations we have in our budget. I also indicated to him that the BOE will continue working on analysis on a number of options. He's fully aware of what the BOE is facing and he's fully aware of what I'm planning for the finance committee to undertake to make whatever budget comes back from the TC, work.
This was not the first conversation we had on the subject and it won't be the last, I assure you.
Tim knows very well that any facility closure requires a cost-analysis study and can't be done by 2/15.
Tim is also aware that increasing participation fees can't be done on whim and must be analyzed so that whatever fee is proposed, it must be fair and it must work to offset the costs of certain programs.
Tim is also aware that eliminating teaching positions is constrained by teacher contract tenure rules and is well aware that this year, due to a smaller group of non-tenured teachers, we don't have any wiggle room on layoffs and if they're undertaken they must be done carefully.
Tim also spends time here reading my blog so he's aware of the details I posted about budget. I spend a great deal of time trying to educate my colleagues on the TC. I believe in cooperation and that's what's needed if this Town is going to get through this budget cycle.
Regarding Mr. Slocum's comments about "intestinal fortitude", if you have any you'll follow through on your commitment to work in a collaborative manner with the BOE. But based on your statement here...it appears you lost that intestinal fortitude somewhere in the Dodd Parking lot after Tuesday's meeting.
Tony Perugini
"Regarding Mr. Slocum's comments about "intestinal fortitude", if you have any you'll follow through on your commitment to work in a collaborative manner with the BOE. But based on your statement here...it appears you lost that intestinal fortitude somewhere in the Dodd Parking lot after Tuesday's meeting." Tony Perugini
Mr. Slocum is not interested in collaborating or listening to the BOE, Dr. Florio, or the parents in the town. He is only interested in his monolithic quest to gut our schools.
"The BOE put into the HSA plan, not the union. It's an option, yet another one, for the union membership to utilize as way to save on health care. It's in way, shape or form an offer or concession. It's Vincent Mascianna trying to help the town, and healthcare plan participants, to save money."
This is not entirely true, the union members are the ones who had to choose to opt into the plan in an effort to save money (for the BOE) on healthcare. No it was not a concession, but an effort to help none-the-less.
"This is not entirely true, the union members are the ones who had to choose to opt into the plan in an effort to save money (for the BOE) on healthcare. No it was not a concession, but an effort to help none-the-less."
Yes, you are correct, the union is helping by choosing to opt into the plan. I stand corrected. Thanks.
Let's say the union agreed to defer some of the salary increase until next year. The BOE would do their job and amend the budget proposal accordingly. Herein lies the problem, the TC would then get a hold of it and have no obligation to fully fund the BOE budget. In fact, the current TC has already shown their disdain for spending money on our schools. I'm sure if we had a more reasonable TC, the union would be open to negotiating, but Mr. Slocum's comments show his state of mind. This TC is too partisan and autocratic.
"The salary account is understated due to credits from ARRA and Federal Teacher's Stimulus funds."
Tony, I'm not sure what your point is here. The funds are being used as they should be, to pay for salaries. Yes salaries have gone up for the teachers that are still here. At least the federal government is helping. I can't say the same for the TC.
I didn't expect to win many friends with my post. I did want to get everyones attention. But there are real fiscal pitfalls with adopting Dr Florios butget. As presented its an increase of 1 1/2 mils. And it does not nor could it possibly predict that the town will get the same amount of ECS funding from the state. If we don't and we really won't know until June, if that funding is less a tax increase would have to exceed 1.5 mils. I believe most taxpayers cannot support this.
This is not anti education. This is not a personal agenda despite some of the rants posted here. This is fact. There are so many what ifs out there I understand why the BOE is forwarding Dr Florio's budget but it won't get fully funded during the TC budget process. Dr Florio knows this too. He may well be stunned his budget has been untouched.
There will be cuts. This is a fact everyone seems to understand yet not everybody wants to deal with it.
The BOE money is not Town Council money. It is the taxpayers money. Cheshire taxpayers support education, always have and always will but budget impacts will be felt across all facits of town government.
New Haven alone is cutting 17 million in their education budget. One could not purport that Mayor Destenfano is anti education either. So I prevail upon you to avoid accusations of agendas, bullying, and other like criticism. I can take criticism but I can't and won't ingnore the realities of town finances.
Tim Slocum
stick to your guns Tim....oops can I say guns? Florio always takes the easy route and lets the TC do the dirty work...
but we have enough money to put in turf....go figure.
Tim S said:
"There are so many what ifs out there I understand why the BOE is forwarding Dr Florio's budget"
But one of the "what ifs" is of the BOEs own making. A year ago the BOE brought school closure (and redistricting) into the local dialogue. It was at that time that the BOE should have directed the Sptd to begin a comprehensive plan... not one that would necessarily be adopted, but one that could be used for planning purposes. Unfortunately that didn't happen. And it is now a "what if."
And Tony said:
Tim knows very well that any facility closure requires a cost-analysis study and can't be done by 2/15.
Tony, it's a legitimate policy disagreement if you feel a Council change to the BOE budget request is wrong for whatever reason. But if you are suggesting that the Council (or TPS) is rushing you to consider a school closure, you are offbase. Look no further than the BOE. Feb 15 is an annual BOE deadline of which you are all aware. And it's only the BOE – not the Council, not the voters – that can direct the Sptd to plan for a school closure. If you are upset about that, then you should work with the Sptd and more senior BOE members to understand why (after only a few months as a BOE member) this wasn’t a high priority for the full BOE? Frankly, GF should've pushed the BOE to bring it up so no one – not BOE members, not parents, not voters, not employees – would feel rushed.
I know you've indicated that the 2020 committee was to be reviewing redistricting, but ultimately the successes and failures (actions and inactions) within the school system are owned by the BOE. So the BOE should have been more assertive.
In short… the size of the BOE budget is fair game. But any suggestion that the BOE lacks sufficient planning time because of a Council directive is entirely unfair in this situation.
Also Tony, I may have missed it, but... did you ever get clarification from GF regarding his statement that CHS classes are "full" ? I'm wondering what defines "full." Is it a contractual agreement, state mandate or something else beyond the control of the BOE, such as fire code? Or is "full" defined by either the Sptd or BOE, in which case you could redefine your own rules. Again, sorry if I missed it. But I think it's important to clarify.
Just watched the Boe's meeting and was glad to hear that the majority of the Boe stated they had hoped for concessions from the teachers' union. Mr. Sobol's speech was excellent.
The Boe realize they will not get the 63 million Florio is requesting and are willing to work with the TC over the next few months. It was clear from the TC members who spoke that they are NOT anti-education and want many of the same things we all want for the students. Both groups hope the teachers union will consider concessions.
That's what it all comes down to. There's no personal agendas. We just need a shared sacrafice across the board.
"In short… the size of the BOE budget is fair game. But any suggestion that the BOE lacks sufficient planning time because of a Council directive is entirely unfair in this situation."
Tim, where have I posted that I feel we're lacking insufficient planning time because of a town council directive?
Answer: I didn't. It's conjecture, a diversion tactic and seems to be your suggestion here. However, what I am saying, and have said repeatedly is the BOE does need more time beyond 2/15 to come up with responsible reductions. Studying the closure of a school, or reducing specific grades at a school moving them to a school that *may* have space, along with all of the cost analysis that goes with it is not going to get resolved in two weeks. It will take the planning, finance and curriculum committees a couple of months to bring that analysis to the public.
I don't feel rushed by anyone. But the fact of the matter is I'm not going to make arbitrary cuts without being able to define the specific cut and what it will save the town without proper analysis. Yes, whether you believe me or not, it's that tight and that serious.
If it gives you any comfort, then you should know that finance/planning/curriculum will continue meeting and analyzing various areas of reduction between now and May or June. We will be reporting progress through the BOE at each business meeting.
Typically, the finance committee stopped meeting after the BOE adopted a budget and would only meet again in June to close the budget. I'm scheduling BOE Finance meetings every month, some twice a month, between now and June for the specific purpose of performing cost-analysis on reductions.
The bottom line here is that half the increase is due to the teacher's salaries.
We are all hoping that we will see some concessions, but if we don't then what??
Lets hope that the next contract talks will take into account the lack of support the teacher's union has shown over the past 2 years.
To all you parents and teachers who continue to attack the TC on this blog----remember, we elect our TC members to run this town in a fiscally responsible way.
To 11:49 AM who asked:
"How many showed up to support the R's budget? A few. Oh, they must be the "silent" majority."
That is really a funny statement.
That "silent" majority showed up at the polls in November and elected, overwhelmingly, this TC to represent them. I think that says it all....doesn't it?
This town wants to be fiscally responsible.
Still wondering why there was a large decrease in public school enrollment while the private schools had an increase. Perhaps the BOE should ask the parents who enrolled their children in these private schools why they did so. They may find their answers interesting.
There is a lot of talk about shared sacrifice and compromise. It seems like the only ones making sacrifices are the BOE because they were forced to by the TC. They had to cut teaching positions the last two years. In what way has the TC shown any degree of compromise? All they have done is patronize the parents and tell them that the rainy day fund is only for natural disasters. They had a chance to pass Mr. Ecke's budget proposal last year, that was a real compromise, but NO. His proposal would have raised taxes about $25 more per household than the R's proposal and used a small portion of the rainy day fund. If you want to have the teachers union propose another concession (last years proposal was rejected out of hand), a good start would be for the TC to publicly state that some portion of the rainy day fund will have to be used to get us through this last year of the contract. The problem has never been the BOE, they are merely caught in the middle and are forced to pick between bad options. The BOE is honestly telling us that their costs are going up and it's not only teacher salaries, but the TC does not want to listen.
"Also Tony, I may have missed it, but... did you ever get clarification from GF regarding his statement that CHS classes are "full" ? I'm wondering what defines "full." Is it a contractual agreement, state mandate or something else beyond the control of the BOE, such as fire code? Or is "full" defined by either the Sptd or BOE, in which case you could redefine your own rules. Again, sorry if I missed it. But I think it's important to clarify."
I'm working on it. I have a report detailing all classes at CHS including instructor, max class size, current class size, essentially the master schedule. The piece I'm working on is the rational (or rules/decision points) behind the class sizes. For that, I plan on meeting with the administration to understand it in more detail. I will post the information as I discover it.
On that note, I've received more reports I need to post on costs/stipends for extra-curricular activities which is going to be the first area of analysis for the finance committee at it's next meeting in Feb.
"That "silent" majority showed up at the polls in November and elected, overwhelmingly, this TC to represent them. I think that says it all....doesn't it?"
What it says to me is that we should not elect something as important as the TC on odd years when voter turnout is really low.
Tony said:
where have I posted that I feel we're lacking insufficient planning time because of a town council directive?
Where you said:
Tim (Slocum) knows very well that any facility closure requires a cost-analysis study and can't be done by 2/15.
You talk about insufficient planning time and suggest that Tim Slocum is pressuring you for action.
It's conjecture, a diversion tactic and seems to be your suggestion here
My view is that the BOE should have been planning for school closures / redistricting a while ago. If that had been happening (after the BOE brought it into the public discussion), then Feb 15 would be entirely irrelevant. The planning would be done and the BOE could knowledgably determine if a school closure / redistricting was appropriate... taking the budget into account.
Instead, you raise Feb 15 as a time-constraint... when it should be a non-issue.
"You talk about insufficient planning time and suggest that Tim Slocum is pressuring you for action."
Once again Tim, you're twisting my words. I'm done wasting my time with you here. Moving on.
"If you want to have the teachers union propose another concession (last years proposal was rejected out of hand),"
Concession? Are you delusional? That wasn't a concession, it was a loan and was rightfully rejected.
"It was clear from the TC members who spoke that they are NOT anti-education and want many of the same things we all want for the students."
Andy Falvey made sense tonight and seems to get it. He was the only TC member concerned with reductions and wants to work with the board throughout the rest of the budget process. Tim was a spectacle. Anne make some good remarks. Let's see if they follow through this time.
Tim slocum is not relavent. Neither is Tim White. This is not about them, they're pathetic. I suggest people stop wasting their time with these two and focus on the rest of the TC, most of them are willing to listen. Good meeting tonight.
10:59
Sounds like a poor loser theory to me.
Admit it, the people who really care about this town spoke and elected officials who would be tough on budgets.
Just surprised that the BOE would pass it along to the TC without any cuts and just hopes that the union will give back.
Plan that they aren't and come up with a way to cut this budget.
Tony, don't take this as a personal attact fromTW and TS, they are just as vested in this process as the rest of us. We jsut want what is best for Cheshire.
We can't continue the way we are going here.
I respect all of you and would hope that you can work together for the betterment of this town.
Thanks Tony for giving us this forum to air our feelings. Lets just get it done in a civil manner.
"So I prevail upon you to avoid accusations of agendas, bullying, and other like criticism."
You need to reap what you sow. The "do as I say not as I do" thing isn't working for you btw.
I wonder how many of the posters on this site are actually teachers who are part of the union.....
Some of the comments sure sound that way.
Trying to explain how taking an HSA is a concession is a joke. More than half our budget increase is due to their salary increases. I am not saying that they aren't entitled to increases, but the town is scrambling to figure out how to cover this expene while they continue to get great benefits and an average pay increas of over 3% for 3 years in the midst of a recession. Whose better then them?
"More than half our budget increase is due to their salary increases."
35.29% of this proposed increase (slide 12 of superintendent budget report) and 0% for the last 2 years.
Exaggeration is a sign of desperation, please stop.
I heard some BOE members mention retirement incentives. Is this an option and it considered a concession? I never understood how a retirement incentive saves money. Paying someone to leave a position doesn't make any sense to me. I don't understand how this is a concession.
This is the same old thing that happens every year. A budget number is put forth by the Superintendent. Mr Sobol comes up with the most realistic solution and nobody votes with him. The BOE had all year to prepare for this decision. The facts remained the same if not worse than last year. What were you all waiting for? You failed to do what you were elected to do period. I know you don't get paid and have other jobs but certain questions should have been asked a long time ago. The TC will had to shoulder the bulk of the criticism from the teachers and students that will show up for the "yearly rally". As a taxpayer I want to see the BOE make some decisions. If they they don't ask the right questions or make the tough decisions why are they needed?? They caused the problem to begin with by approving a contract that was not fair to the teachers or the taxpayers and again they didn't do their job. I hope the taxpayer wake up and support the TC on the very tough decisions they must come up with to balance a budget that we can afford without forcing the taxes to increase to a level where businesses and taxpayer will move out of this wonderful Town. Please work this out. Good luck.
It seems that Alan Sobol was all talk last night, no action on his part either. For someone that's been on the BOE 10 years you'd think he would make a motion to reduce the budget. Instead, his speech was nothing more than glad-facing the public. If he had a specific reduction in mind, why didn't he propose a motion? It seems Mr. Sobol is all talk, no action.
Same can be said of the other 'senior' members on the BOE, Dixon and Mwroka. Between the three of them they have about 30 years experience on the BOE but none of them are able to make recommendations on reductions. Last year, it seems Mr. Dixon and Mr. Sobol had no problems making and supporting motions for reductions. What changed?
Mr. Sobol knew that there was no support from any other boe member so making a motion to reduce the proposed budget would be a waste of time.
He made excellent points in his speech and he showed he wasn't in favor of the budget by voting against it.
He talked a great game but proposed nothing. He represents a vote on the boe and if he had something of substance to propose he should've amended the motion. Whether it would've been defeated or not is not applicable. Do the right thing even if you believe it's going to get shot down.
I'm not happy with the increase. But I understand what's at stake with drastic cuts and the constraints the boe must work with. Thank you Tony for what you're doing but you have to make certain that the boe follows through on it's promises last night to work on reductions WITH the town council. I think you have your work cut out for you but don't become complacement on this budget.
A 3 mil increase will equate to a 12% jump in our taxes. Average one house two cars could mean $720-$1500 more per year? This is without the Towns budget. People can't absorb this much of an increase now. Please correct me if I'm wrong with the mumbers.
The BOE new last yr that this yr would be tighter...how has a yr gone by and you still need more time to figure out a plan?
- what's the rational behind the "class full" line?...smaller classes equal more teachers.
Tony - I bet some nights you wish you never got into this blog thing...its actually probably a bigger service to the community than the meetings....thanks
Tim is wearing on you from Haiti...imagine if he was still here? One Love!
Tony said:
Once again Tim, you're twisting my words. I'm done wasting my time with you here. Moving on.
I have no intent to "twist" words and / or "distract." But it seems to me that the BOE dropped the ball in terms of planning for a school closure. (If I’m wrong, I hope you will clarify.)
In the meantime, context and clarity are important.
My goal is to ensure that budget conversations in April do not inadvertently place blame on the Council by conflating two different issues:
1) the appropriateness of a school closure (Council & BOE share ownership); and
2) the proper planning for a school closure (BOE has exclusive ownership).
Again, no intent to manipulate your words. But therein lies the beauty of a blog… both our comments are “on the record” for others to judge.
"Admit it, the people who really care about this town spoke and elected officials who would be tough on budgets."
The people who elected this TC only care about keeping their own taxes low. Unfortunately, the ones who suffer are the families. The same families that support the local businesses. If they continue on this course the businesses and families will be gone and Cheshire will be a ghost town.
"I heard some BOE members mention retirement incentives. Is this an option and it considered a concession? I never understood how a retirement incentive saves money. Paying someone to leave a position doesn't make any sense to me. I don't understand how this is a concession."
It is not a concession, but it does save the BOE money long term because they either don't replace that position or replace it with a much lower salary.
Tony: I noticed you made a comment that suggested that fact that the BOE approved Dr. Florio's budget was a sign of good faith to the union. Unfortunately, I don't think their reservations have much to do with the BOE. The problem is with the TC who last year cut the BOE budget (twice) AND refused to use any of the rainy day fund to prevent further teacher layoffs. The TC is unilateraly asking for concessions while doing the exact opposite of what would help the situation. Rather than seeking a compromise Mr. Slocum continues to promise further cuts and offers no help to the BOE. He only criticizes them for not making more cuts. Hey Tim maybe it's time to retire from public dis-service.
"Mr Sobol comes up with the most realistic solution and nobody votes with him."
What was his realistic solution? Cramming large numbers of our children into lecture halls? Sounds like the idea of a man who is out of touch with reality.
Tim,
"Again, no intent to manipulate your words. But therein lies the beauty of a blog… both our comments are “on the record” for others to judge."
I went back and re-read my response to Tim. My issue with his response was the "intestinal fortitude" comment on the part of the BOE, not the timing. Although, I found his intestinal fortitude Thurs night. :-)
Context is a funny thing...I try my best to put my thoughts here in the proper context...sometimes it works sometimes I miss the mark. But I agree with you, I'm willing to put my thoughts out in the open and let people make their own judgements. I know you're looking out for the taxpayer's interests and I do appreciate your contributions here. - tony
"Tony: I noticed you made a comment that suggested that fact that the BOE approved Dr. Florio's budget was a sign of good faith to the union. Unfortunately, I don't think their reservations have much to do with the BOE. The problem is with the TC who last year cut the BOE budget (twice) AND refused to use any of the rainy day fund to prevent further teacher layoffs."
I cut the BOE education twice before it got to the TC last year. First was the $675K reduction made by the finance committee and then the final $975K cut I voted on before it was sent to the TC. The TC did not cut the BOE budget twice.
The rainy fund is NOT the silver bullet. It's a vital part of our financial well-being as a town and one of the reasons why we enjoy low-interest rates on our bonds. It's not to say the town can't take money out of it but it has to be replenished and so far nobody seems to be addressing the replenishment problem.
How much should the TC take out of the rainy day fund to support the education budget? $500k, $1M, $2M?
And what about next year...should we lose $1.5M in ECS sharing...then what? Hit the rainy day fund again for another $1.5M? The $540K teacher stimulus is gone in 2012. Do we hit the rainy day fund again for another $500K?
There's a current $500K shortfall in special ed costs. Do we hit fund now for $500K?
The fund is not the answer. It may be a part of the overall solution but it will take many parts to get through this.
However, knowing my colleagues on the TC I do know they are fair. I have to believe that if the union comes forward and agrees with the BOE on a concession that the TC would look upon it very favorably. I think the BOE gave the union a reason to work with us on a concession Thurs night. It would be a waste not to take advantage of it. If it's about the students...NOW is the time to act.
However, I'm not sitting here 'hoping' for a concession as the end-all, be-all solution to our budget. There will be reductions. They will not be pleasant to any stakeholder. How deep they go depends on how much help we receive from all stakeholders.
Tony: I agree that the rainy day fund is not the silver bullet, but it can help the situation for ALL stakeholders. Realistic people don't expect tax increases or concessions to solve the whole problem, it's going to take compromise. The union can help reduce the BOE spending and the TC can help the BOE with funding to deal with increased costs.
Last year the TC quite transparently only "helped" the BOE deal with increased transportation and utlities costs. They specifically made sure that no funding was supplied for salaries in an effort to force the BOE to make layoffs. Mr. Ecke offered a plan to help the BOE with funding by using a small tax increase (~$25 per avg household) and using a small portion (<10%) of the rainy day fund. It was rejected. The union offered a NO INTEREST loan (~0.6 million?) in the form of promisory days to help reduce spending. It was rejected.
This year >100 union members opted to switch to the HSA health plan to help the BOE reduce spending. So far this year I have only heard the TC say that the rainy day fund is off limits and that they will not fund the proposed BOE budget. Doesn't that seem rather one sided? You say that the TC is fair, but their actions last year and their rhetoric this year would suggest otherwise. Mr. Falvey said that the town simply can't afford to fund the BOE budget proposal with tax increases. I believe him. Can someone on the TC besides Mr. Slocum come forward and at least attempt to work on a compromise and stop spewing rhetoric?
Quite simply the TC is asking the union to make concessions first, then wait to see what the TC does to help the BOE. What would lead the union to believe that the TC would step in to help the BOE? Last years' budget decisions? Come on! Why doesn't the TC come up with a plan to show what they can do to help the BOE deal with rising costs first? Since they are in control of the funding end wouldn't that make sense?
Thanks Tony. Also I reread your comments and I have a better appreciation of your intent.
Conveying feelings in writing is always tough.
I recall one time when I asked Henry to make sure he replayed a particular meeting. I thought I was simply increasing voter awareness. But then a blogger called me out... noting that by virtue of me *not* asking Henry to replay *all* meetings, then regardless of my intent, I was being unfair.
It completely caught me offguard, but the blogger was dead on accurate.
Anyway... just saying that writing is tough. But the openness of your blog is fantastic. I think it really is a huge benefit to the entire community... including those living overseas temporarily! I had one Cheshire resident who was transfered to England for two years. While he was there he read TWL to stay current.
Can we all agree on these two statements?
1) Tax payers do not have endlessly deep pcokets.
2) Teachers provide a valuable service.
If we can't put our political beliefs aside and agree on those two things, we are doomed.
With regard to the rainy day fund, I agree with Tony that it's part of the equation... not only with the school budget, but the whole town.
As with all governments, the Council has three choices:
1) taxes;
2) spending;
3) debt.
Personally, I think the rainy day fund is unnecessarily large. It's around 10% I think. And that's if you exclude all the other reserves. I don't see any reason why it needs to be so large. 5% is adequate IMO.
If it were me, my focus would be to find ways to reduce the town's debt, including all the long-term liabilities. That includes the pension funds, the OPEB, the sewer plant, heart & hypertension, etc. If I recall correctly, the town is supposed to put $2 million into the OPEB fund this year... and that's mostly for retired teachers. Would the Teachers' Union consider full OPEB funding this year a concession? It ought to be, if the feds have no intention of enforcing the new law.
Also, the Council does normally include about $500,000 to $1 million of the rainy day fund in the annual operating budget. So it would be inaccurate to suggest it isn't normally used.
I agree the rainy day fund is too large at 10%, but isn't that the percent that the democrats set in their policy they passed.
What to you wanna bet that when the numbers get crunched whatever amount the R's say they may use from the fund, the D's will say we should use more all in a planned attempt to make themselves look good...and they're the ones who passed a policy to keep it at near 10%. Go figure. What a game these people play.
During my first budget in April 2004, the Council's goal for the rainy day fund was 5% of the annual operating budget. By January 2008, the Council adopted a policy of an 8% minimum for the rainy day fund. I opposed it because it was bad policy.
The policy was largely a result of the "ratings agencies" (and other gov't-related orgs) that were entirely discredited when the world came to know they were liars who rigged the system for their own gain via the shadow-banking system that led to the bailouts.
There's no sound basis for the 8%. It's a make-believe number that gives orgs self-justification... "do as we say because we're smarter than you." Of course, that was only made possible because they were given credibility by the powers-that-be (i.e. Chris "I love bailouts for bankers" Dodd).
The whole financial system needs an overhaul beginning with an audit of The Fed.
Once that happens, I expect Ben Bernanke's house of cards to begin collapsing.
But that's gonna take a while.
In the meantime, I suggest working down the long-term liabilities by using the rainy day fund. And it's worth noting that, although the Council didn't do much of that last year, it did dedicate much of the CRRA millions to long-term liabilities. And frankly, working them down is not that simple. Town staff told me that it's illegal to buyout a pension... which seems stupid to me, if both parties agree. But that's what I was told.
So maybe that's a state law that should be changed? It could enable the Council to reduce the town's long-term liabilities... and also reduce the significance of the Town's rainy day fund in next summer's negotiations with the Teachers' Union.
Some people asked me after Thursday's meeting about what they can do to influence the TC to support the BOE budget proposal.
My response is: Listen. Listen to what the TC is trying to balance with the overall town budget. Listen to the financial issues the town is facing. Also listen to those opposed to raising taxes for many in town are struggling in this economy.
I don't recommend showing up to the TC meetings with torches and pitch forks, so to speak, as I think it's clear to all TC, and BOE members, that folks are passionate and concerned. Nobody on the TC is anti-education.
"the D's will say we should use more all in a planned attempt to make themselves look good...and they're the ones who passed a policy to keep it at near 10%. Go figure. What a game these people play."
It's an election year and I would expect some on the TC to utilize their seat and microphone as a political bully pulpit to influence elections this fall by pandering to the public with false promises. I don't think people will be fooled this time around, however.
I also encourage folks to attend the committee meetings that will be held on various parts of the town budget. This year, the BOE and TC are going to work closely together to review the education budget. By the time those meetings begin, the BOE will have better detail about areas of reduction to share with the TC.
While the TC can't, and shouldn't, direct the BOE on which specific reductions to make, they are very interested in learning more about the impact. I spoke with Tim Slocum this morning and we both agree that we will collaborate in this manner because some of the issues in this budget go beyond Cheshire and directly to Hartford and we believe working in this manner is in the best interests for all stakeholders.
Anyway, I will hope folks will listen on these sub-committee meetings. We'll post details as these meetings become scheduled.
At some point people have to realize that adding 2-3 million to the school budget every year is not an option. Some say raid the rainy day fund to give the BOE the money that it needs. Fine but that money is in there forever and gets added to every BOE budget down the road. The rainy day fund if it is used should be used to pay down debt to lower taxes and for "one time" emergency expenses only. Our education costs are getting so high that maybe we should put all our students in private schools it would be cheaper.
"I don't recommend showing up to the TC meetings with torches and pitch forks, so to speak, as I think it's clear to all TC, and BOE members, that folks are passionate and concerned. Nobody on the TC is anti-education."
The decisions that the R's on the TC have spoken as to where their priorities lie. They have placed the rainy day fund above education on their priority list. Some on the TC continue to ignore those who think that education should be our highest, but not only priority. The make it sound like that the pro-education people are some small special interest group. Sorry, but it is not just the parents of children in school. There are parents that will have children in school, parents that used to have children in school, people who have relatives' children in school, and people who recognize the value of good schools on property values, businesses, and the quality of life in this town. Ignoring these people is certainly autocratic and short sighted. The effect of their decisions will be felt for years to come, not just in the schools, but in property values and the well being of our town.
Once again, to remind all of you, this council was overwhelmingly voted in by the residents of this town who wanted fiscal responsibility.
I am head of household of one of those "families" that you speak of. I have children in the school system, and I have plenty of friends who are in similar situations. We are not ALL in favor of just handing over the 5% increase. We want our children educated, but we also want to be able to afford living in this town. We aren't all wealthy. We are hard working people and we all have had to tighten our belts to get by these past couple of years. I am insulted by those who say if you can't afford to live here then move out. I can afford to live here, but I ask our TC to make sure they keep it that way.
You can say all you want, but this TC is not anti-education. They are concerned about the residents in this town and keeping the spending under control.
Lets hope they find a happy median.
Remember, we all don't have deep pockets and if that precious poster is correct, a $720 to $1500 tax increase will be a huge hit on many of us.
To 8:03
Keep drinking the kool aid...
35.29 is teacher's salary increases, 27.8% is increase in benefits, it's all fuzzy math...
In the private sector, those additional health plan costs are passed along to us. I wish I had a health plan even close to what the teachers have.
When you look at Florio's budget proposal, the majority of it is for salry and benefit increases. You don't see any additional funding going to school programs. So logically, the only place we can save is by getting concessions from the teachers. Let's see if they have enough guts to do it. If not, lets hope their next contract will reflect their willingness or lack there of to negotiate.
12:08
I hear you that we are not all wealthy, even more reason to use some of the rainy day fund to keep tax increases to a minimum. No one expects the 5% to be funded strictly by tax increases, but if the TC continues to say that the rainy day fund is off limits, it's hard to believe that they are not just fighting some partisan battle that they want to "win". The town is the loser in that battle.
Look, hindsight is 20/20 and if the people negotiating the teachers contract 3 years ago had known that the economy was going to take this big a downturn, than the contract would have looked conmpletely different. Regardless of whether the union negotiates some other deal or not, the new contract will be adjusted for the current economic conditions. In the meantime people will have to pay higher fees for extracurricular activities, we will have to use a reasonable portion of the rainy day fund, and there will have to be a modest tax increase. If we keep cramming more kids in our classes and cutting programs than we will lose a lot more tax money in the long run from people moving away. Do we want Cheshire to be the land of for sale or rent signs? Families and businesses (who depend on families) will just move out if slightly lower taxes and an oversized rainy day fund is all we have to offer.
If former TC member and republican Tim White says our rainy day fund is oversized, then why do Tim Slocum and David Schrumm continue to try and feed us the same load of crap that it is only there for natural disasters? Is anybody really that gullible to believe that?
Maybe you should ask Mike Ecke why he wanted and voted for a policy that kept the rainy day fund so high.
If you use a million from it towards Florio's over 5% increase do you want to use another million next year? Even if the teachers' contract gets negotiated with slightly lower raises, the overall budget will more than likely go up another 3 million or more.
Should we take another million out of it?
If the teacher's union takes a wage freeze and frees up $1M, then the budget request would be 3%, or a $2M increase. I'm certain that the TC and BOE can find middle ground on this and with specific reductions/fee increases it can be a win-win for everyone.
Aliens will land on Mr. Schrumm's front yard and proclaim him to be their leader before this, or any, TC approves a 5% budget increase.
I think the town stands to benefit from a new discussion on the rainy day fund policy. The 8% was decided three years ago.
Perhaps a different number / measurement is appropriate.
If there's a general consensus that the fund balance should be lower, then there should be a discussion on where the balance should go:
1) taxes
2) spending
3) long-term liabilities
Long-term liabilities are my top concern.
You should have a rainy day fund though for natural disasters.
I don't recall when exactly it was... maybe a year ago (or more) that SE CT got hit by massive floods. As of last October, I knew of one particular (through) road in Groton that was washed out, had not been fixed and was effectively two dead end streets.
In that particular situation, maybe it's staying that way residents want a dead end street. Or maybe it's a lack of funds. I don't know.
But I believe Cheshire has dozens of "local bridges" that Cheshire would need to pay for improvements. And I'm guessing that at least some of Cheshire's roads would become "islands" if washed out because the brooks / rivers cross under cul-de-sacs.
Using all of the rainy day fund would be unwise. But there's no reason it needs to remain so high.
Again though, the Council uses the rainy day fund annually for the budget. So I think the questions are:
1) How much is the right amount to use this year from the RDF?
2) How much money (or %) should be in the RDF after the budget is adopted?
To say that either TS or DS refuse to use the RDF on anything, but natural disasters, is simply not true.
How about this - Since the rainy day fund is really tax dollars being held, why not give a portion of them back to each taxpayer and reduce the fund to a more reasonable amount. Then all the people that want to see Florio's budget approved can give back their portion and direct it towards education. It's that or just make your own donation to the town directed it to education. It can be done that way too.
12:08 said "if the people negotiating the teachers contract 3 years ago had known that the economy was going to take this big a downturn, than the contract would have looked conmpletely different "
Don't know what planet you were living on in 2008, but at the time the teachers contract was agreed to by the TC, the bottom had already fallen out of the economy. I still remember the D's arguing that we shouldn't pay $20,000 to go to binding arbitration. Now we are paying millions for that mistake.
"Don't know what planet you were living on in 2008, but at the time the teachers contract was agreed to by the TC, the bottom had already fallen out of the economy. I still remember the D's arguing that we shouldn't pay $20,000 to go to binding arbitration. Now we are paying millions for that mistake."
The economy starting tanking late 2006. It peaked in 2008, I know I was there when it happened. The contract was signed amidst the biggest economic collapse in history.
Why? I feel it's because some on the BOE, then, felt we would lose, and lose big if it went to binding arbitration. Binding arbitration may have made the increase 18-20%, I'm told.
I still believe the negotiation process needs to be open to the public. After all, public tax dollars are paying for these contracts and the public deserves transparency in the process.
100th comment... Tony... good job on the conversation...
For reference, I recall:
Sept 19, 2008 -- Hank Paulson announces the bailout for his buddies at Goldman Sachs or "civilization will end!"
Sept 29 -- House vote fails
Oct 2 -- House vote passes
Oct 4 -- Senate vote passes (to help line the pockets of Chris Dodd's campaign funders)
Early October -- BOE adopts the contract
Early November -- Council adopts the contract
The timeline was something like that. Everyone was fully aware that there were problems *before* the Council and the BOE adopted the budget.
And with it looking like gasoline is headed toward $4/gallon in the near future, it's worth noting that the Council has been spearheading a townwide energy conservation plan... that may have provide some significant savings for the BOE in the next couple years.
Tony, any idea how the walkthru went for the schools? If you guys stay on top of it, it may be possible to get some work done this summer at CHS and/or Dodd for some actual savings next winter... as well as an improved learning environment.
I do think you'll have to stay on top of it. I think Jimmy has it in the planning committee. The BOEs planning committee may want to be active in the discussion... although that may very well already be happening.
"Tony, any idea how the walkthru went for the schools? If you guys stay on top of it, it may be possible to get some work done this summer at CHS and/or Dodd for some actual savings next winter... as well as an improved learning environment."
Vincent Masciana is on top of it and (BOE) should be getting an update at the next Planning meeting. Looking forward to it.
"Don't know what planet you were living on in 2008, but at the time the teachers contract was agreed to by the TC, the bottom had already fallen out of the economy. I still remember the D's arguing that we shouldn't pay $20,000 to go to binding arbitration. Now we are paying millions for that mistake."
Are you saying the economy has improved since 2008? Not from where I sit. If that was true, there wouldn't be that much to complain about. Then again some will complain even if taxes go up 0.1% and teachers salaries go up 0.1 %. They just don't want to deal with reality.
"It's that or just make your own donation to the town directed it to education. It can be done that way too." What planet do you live on? This TC would make sure that none of that money would go to the BOE. Look at what happened to the $0.5 million from the state for special ed reimbursement. Did any of that make it to the BOE as intended by the state? NO!
"The timeline was something like that. Everyone was fully aware that there were problems *before* the Council and the BOE adopted the budget."
Tim, we are supposed to believe you knew the full extent of what was going to happen in the following three years? Yeah right, and I'm Nostradamus.
Would you rather pay $50 more in taxes or lose $50,000 in equity on your house? Tough choice. Those who like to scale down to a smaller home when they retire and going to lose huge amounts of money if property values drop. Any decent real estate agent can tell you that property values in Cheshire are higher than the surrounding towns because of the schools, not low taxes.
5:36 PM
Your statement is outright false. I presume its due to your misunderstanding of the budget.
There has been no reimbursement for the transportation services from the state yet. The concern is that it is very high this year due to some very expensive special ed outplacements. The BOE was made aware of this early on by DR. Florio and he has budgeted for it now to cover the increase, which has typically been fully reimbursed by the state.
Money coming to the town for education goes to education. It does not go to public works or to surplus. All state funding accounts for about 25% of the the Ed expenditures and the remaining 75% is born by local taxpayers.
If the Ed budget has not been fully expended for budgeted purposes in one year it often ends up in the medical trust fund or is encumbered for next years consumption within the category it had been budgeted for in the prior year. This is why BOE doesn't show a surplus but in fact may have some wiggle room when adjustments are made to the budget.
"Aliens will land on Mr. Schrumm's front yard and proclaim him to be their leader"
I think that already happened. At least it seems that way.
"Your statement is outright false. I presume its due to your misunderstanding of the budget."
Mr. Perugini must have the same misunderstanding. Perhaps it is the TC that is trying to sweep it under the rug.
Tim, we are supposed to believe you knew the full extent of what was going to happen in the following three years?
No. But at the time of the bailout, the Banking Committee Chair, Chris Dodd, said something to the effect of "the oxygen was sucked out of the room." He was talking about the moment when Hank Paulson announced to a bunch of Senators what was happening.
For a bunch of US Senators to be at a loss for words is amazing.
I wasn't saying I knew the future with absolute clarity. I'm just saying that everyone knew it was bad. And accepting the contract was bad policy IMO.
"I wasn't saying I knew the future with absolute clarity. I'm just saying that everyone knew it was bad. And accepting the contract was bad policy IMO."
Fair enough, but had it gone to binding arbitration would it have been substantially different?
" Anonymous said...
"It's that or just make your own donation to the town directed it to education. It can be done that way too." What planet do you live on? This TC would make sure that none of that money would go to the BOE."
Think again. I made a donation to the town of Cheshire and directed 1/2 of it to the town and the other 1/2 to the Boe. It went through as I had requested. Don't say that it can't be done.
"Think again. I made a donation to the town of Cheshire and directed 1/2 of it to the town and the other 1/2 to the Boe. It went through as I had requested. Don't say that it can't be done."
Was that recently (with this TC)?
"There has been no reimbursement for the transportation services from the state yet. The concern is that it is very high this year due to some very expensive special ed outplacements. The BOE was made aware of this early on by DR. Florio and he has budgeted for it now to cover the increase, which has typically been fully reimbursed by the state."
Not correct. The State reimburses school districts on Special Education funding based on a simple formula. I detailed it here http://tonyperuginilistens.blogspot.com/2011/01/special-education-costs-outplacements.html
And Dr. Florio has NOT budgeted for the unexpected ~$500K increase. The budget is tracking to be overbudget by about ~$200K at this point in time.
"All state funding accounts for about 25% of the the Ed expenditures and the remaining 75% is born by local taxpayers."
Where did you get these numbers from?
"If the Ed budget has not been fully expended for budgeted purposes in one year it often ends up in the medical trust fund or is encumbered for next years consumption within the category it had been budgeted for in the prior year.
The BOE cannot encumber surpluses. Any surplus at the end of the fiscal year is either put towards the medical trust fund or given back to the town. They cannot be carried over to the next budget.
"This is why BOE doesn't show a surplus but in fact may have some wiggle room when adjustments are made to the budget."
The myth about encumbering money in the BOE budget for wiggle room is not true except for MTF which can only be used for Medical costs. The appearance of wiggle room comes from freezing certain accounts (textbooks/supplies/maintenance) as we did in Dec due to the Spec Ed costs issue. We did this last year to cover a $200K shortfall in the Special Ed budget. Depending on how harsh or mild winters are also plays a role with our energy-related expenses and snow removal. Although this winter, I don't expect any savings from snow removal or heating costs due to the weather we've been having.
Right now, the education budget is projected to be over-expended by ~$200K.
had it gone to binding arbitration would it have been substantially different?
I don't know and we'll never know. I just know that it was obvious to everyone how bad things were.
"The BOE never has surpluses". Boy, are they good at budgeting. I think they do forsee the future. If they are short who do they get the money from? They ask the TC and the TC uses the "rainy Day Fund" and if that is at zero then a special tax assesment is given to the taxpayers. This has not happened in Cheshire, but it has in other towns. It seems we (BOE and Town) always have enough money every year with a small surplus. I believe that we have been overtaxed the last several years and thus created a "Rainy Day Fund". I believe this fund should be reduced to a smaller level and the remaining used to pay donwn our debt. Then we would realize a savings every year in the future which could help us in the long run with the BOE and the Town budget.
Anonymous said...
"Would you rather pay $50 more in taxes or lose $50,000 in equity on your house?"
Sure I'll take only $50 more in taxes/year...but if you're trying to say this would be the amount of the increase if the budgets get approved as is, I think you're way off. The increase would be way more than that.
"Sure I'll take only $50 more in taxes/year...but if you're trying to say this would be the amount of the increase if the budgets get approved as is, I think you're way off. The increase would be way more than that."
Well that all depends on whether the TC "chooses" to use some of the rainy day fund. Last year Mr. Ecke's proposal would have cost the average taxpayer ~$25 more per household, but would have used some of the RDF. Both were intended to fund the BOE and lessen the impact on our schools and property values. The highly partisan TC rejected it. They feel that they were elected to do just that. Sorry, but that was a blatant slap in the face to a large part of the population in Cheshire. Unfortunately, they did not turn out to vote in 2009. Hopefully, it will be different this year.
had it gone to binding arbitration would it have been substantially different?
I don't know and we'll never know. I just know that it was obvious to everyone how bad things were.
Tim: I think you do know that it would have turned out basically the same based on past history statewide. People may have known that the economy was starting to turn south, but no one knew what the impact was going to be 2-3 years down the road. The TC didn't even know they were going to run a >$1 million dollar surplus THIS year.
Post a Comment