There was a fair attendance at the 7pm meeting last night at the Holbrook School for the Proposed 2009-2010 School Budget. Most of the chairs were occupied and there were probably 20 or so people sitting up on the bleachers.
The Moderator was elected (nice voice) and the session began. If you retained the mailer from the Superintendent of Schools the following should be easy to follow. If not, there are copies at your Town Office. There will be a print out at the voting area in the three Town Offices next Tuesday - the 11th - of the following for people who do not follow this blog.
Voting will be from 8am - 8pm at the Eddington and Clifton Town Offices.
Holden's hours for voting will be from 7am - 8pm.
The Motion to directly go to Article 16 was defeated so we went through each article in order.
Article 2 - Regular Instruction was reduced by $86,548. because that was the amount previous allocated for the laptop/technology program associated with the projected 312 students going to Brewer High School. (As you may know, Brewer vetoed activating that program as a cost-cutting measure in the Brewer High School Budget.) Because of Brewer's elimination of the program, the $86,548. was no longer needed in the SAD63 budget. Therefore, Article 2 was approved for only $5,251,127.
Article 3 - Student and Staff Support was approved as originally proposed at $425,503.
Article 4 - Special Education was approved as originally proposed at $1,193,749.
Article 5 - Facilities Maintenance was approved as originally proposed at $718,757.
Article 6 - Transportation & Buses was approved as originally proposed at $596,708. [NOTE: It was pointed out by Susan Shane from Eddington that there was an additional line item in the mailer for an increase of 4% in salaries & wages that had not been included in the May 13 Public Hearing. It was explained this was the pay increase given to the bus drivers. -I believe this is what occurred at the Executive Session following the last School Board Meeting.]
Article 7 - System Administration was approved as originally proposed at $288,006. [NOTE: The Business Manager stated she was not receiving any pay raise in the coming year and DID NOT receive any contract extension to her existing contract which currently expires 6/30/10. She further stated the increase noted for salaries & benefits in Central Services in the amount of $8,708. was (as I understood) for an increase in a part-time worker plus one additional day for another existing staff...no comment. The Chairman of the School Board stated the Interim Superintendent has been asked to stay on as Interim Superintendent through the next Fiscal Year and he has agreed. That accounts for a portion of the $73,500 allocated to the salaries & wages in the Superintendent's office. My information is that the Interim Superintendent is being paid $600./week. The Interim Superintendent stated it is his hope/expectation that SAD63 will form an RSU - possibly with Orrington and Dedham - within the coming year and that having an Interim Superintendent will avoid the necessity of eliminating a duplicate superintendent position since Orrington already has a Superintendent. Makes fiscal sense as long as that individual is acceptable to the individuals in SAD63. ]
Article 8 - School Administration was approved as originally proposed at $392,542. [NOTE: At this point two of us did speak out regarding the 4% pay increase scheduled for the principals and questioned why there was NO attempt anywhere in this proposed budget to cut anywhere considering the economic times and the financial hardships beings placed on so many homes in our towns. You would have thought we were asking people to cut off their arms. A gentleman asked why we had not raised that issue when the 4% pay increase for the bus drivers had been mentioned. - Personally, I don't think the bus drivers make all that much as compared to the principals and driving in snow storms on icy roads are worth something in my book. So 4% of not much is not much. Four percent of a lot is a lot. But it was obvious no one in that room was willing to give even a little for those who are experiencing hard times.]
Article 9 - Other Instruction was approved as originally proposed at $45,092.
Article 10 - Career and Technical Education was approved as originally proposed at $197,645. [NOTE: Even though I believe the official notes of the last School Board meeting will bear me out that $10,780. of this money is a one-time expense associated with a financial error in the books at UTC, the Interim Superintendent tried to explain last night that he expects this amount to be standard or increase in future years for adjustments in UTC's tuition...no comment.]
Article 11 - Debt Service was approved as originally proposed at $224,243.
Article 12 - All other expenditures was approved as originally proposed at $58,094.
Article 13 - The town by town appropriations and amounts to be raised by towns were approved as originally proposed - with discussion as follows:
1. The Interim Superintendent stated that State law required the wording and amounts shown in the mailer in order for SAD63 to receive State education funding (so the voters didn't really have any choice IF we wanted to receive any State funding) - however, these amounts were based on the expectations that SAD63 towns were going to have to pay (that the State would be taking from it's allocation) the $163,167 penalty for vetoing the school consolidation plan at the end of 2008.
As of last night, the State Legislative House and Senate had passed an Emergency Bill that would waive for one year the payment of those penalties (in the expectation that such districts as SAD63 will form an RSU within the coming year). The Bill was being sent to the Governor's desk for approval.
2. Now, IN THEORY (according to the Interim Superintendent) IF the Governor approves the Emergency Bill, the $163,167 will be recalculated into the appropriations/amounts to be raised by the towns listed in Article 13 - BUT the Bill has to be approved by the Governor BEFORE the June 9th vote in order for the SAD63 School Budget Total to be changed from the amount shown below. Look for information at your Town Office since this may help you determine your vote. You can always ask for what the total amount of the School Budget is that you will be voting for. REMEMBER: The 2008-2009 budget was : $9,248,961. Anything above that is an increase. (And that amount meant we were spending $9,767. per student in SAD63 per year.)
Article 14 - To confirm what amount the District will pay for Debt Service - approved as originally proposed - $63,000.
Article 15 - To determine the amount SAD63 shall raise and appropriate in additional funds which exceeds the State's Essential Programs and Services allocation model. This amount was changed from the original amount proposed by the $86,548 as referenced in the deduction in Article 2. The approved amount is now $956,848.11.
Article 16 - The sum total of the Proposed Budget Now stands at $9,388,372 (an increase of $139,411 - which, in theory, could be lower IF the Governor signs the Emergency Bill referenced in Article 13.) However, if we vote for the approved budget total shown here and the Governor rescinds the penalty after we vote, there is no guarantee the district won't receive the additional money AND the taxpayers could STILL be taxed at the higher level.
The remaining Articles were approved (such as they were originally written since they had already been incorporated in Article 12.)
As to the Final Voting - The majority of the Eddington voters approved the new budget total (as shown in Article 16 above) but there were some "no" votes. The same can be said for the Clifton vote. But ALL Holden votes approved the new budget total.
Be sure you know what you are voting for. Because of the unusual wording of this year's ballot, be aware of the above budget total: $9,388,373 (an increase of $139,411 over the last year's budget)
READ THE WORDING OF THE BALLOT CAREFULLY. IF IT ASKS IF YOU AGREE WITH THE DECISION MADE AT THE JUNE 4TH MEETING, YOU ARE AGREEING TO THE FIGURE POSTED HERE.
An interesting side note: At the last Budget & Finance Meeting, (my notes) there was a remark by the Business Manager of a "carry-over" from the 2008-2009 budget in the area of $300,000. That happened last year, too, which reduced the ACTUAL increase from $600,000 to $300,000. I'm wondering if/where that carry-over is in the 2009-10 budget because I don't see it reflected in the document we received in the mail.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
As we all know, most folks attend meetings, out of there busy schedules, only when prompted or items concerning or affecting them are put forward. This is no different with the SAD budget, mostly educators or folks with kids in school. My phone went nuts with people calling me very unkind names regarding my stance on reducing the overall budget, especially in administration. Telling me I didn't care about kids and the business clerk or bookkeepeer was worth the funds provided or MORE for all the work done. One call was with a school board member and got so heated that we had to end the call. I of all people being a select person and parent with kids in school should be supportive of the budget and don't I trust the school board to make decisions. First I beleive in the 1st amendment and the right of the people to speak and vote. And so they voted last night, a stacked deck always helps - never try and buck education.
ReplyDeleteThere was absolutely NOTHING raised that jeopardized the teachers' pay or their raises. All of that is firmly in places via their union's contract with the district. But none of them considered that.
ReplyDeleteNONE of the Administration's or Central Office contracts was legal this entire past year, including the Principals contracts, and the Business Manager knew it (not that she brought it to the attention of the School Board because they would have had to review and approve those contracts and might have found what was eventually found.)
The Business Manager is grossly overpaid - by at least $20 thousand - and that is the evaluation of an administrator/chief executive officer of a large health facility. The fact that the district has been contracting out the payroll processing (to the tune of $6,500. - it's in the mailer budget) AND that work was done by Chris Smith, the B.M.'s predecessor, who was paid $14./hour, who did ALL of the work now being done by the B.M. (who now has an additional Part-Time person) indicates we are certainly NOT getting what even the $72,000 is paying for. (Of course, if the B.M. got to work at 8am like most people making that kind of money would be.....)
As to trusting the School Board? - I think there's been enough information presented here to justify why no one should be trusting most of those members - they know they've been lied to,but they won't stand up to the B.M. They aren't even doing the job they were elected to do (ask Clifton's rep. what committees he's on and how many committee meetings he's attended). If he doesn't have the time to fulfill the responsibilities of the position to which he was elected, how can he really know what's going on? What each and every School Board member needs to remember is that he/she is ALSO accountable to every taxpayer. They do seem to forget that.
I just know that I haven't heard anyone in Eddington say they were going to vote for the budget even as it stood after the June 4th meeting. On the other hand, it was clear the other night that the teachers and those parents who spoke up are only thinking about themselves - nothing about the bigger picture or how many people are facing extreme financial hardship while the children in SAD63 receive an education costing annually what is considered close to the same as the annual tuition and books at any Maine University or college.
It will be interesting to see HOW MANY vote tomorrow - and how many know what they're voting for (or against as the case may be).