Norwich adopts budget, still “work in progress” board president says
NORWICH – The $37,090,193 budget adopted by the Norwich City School District’s board of education Wednesday night represents a 2.07 percent decrease in district spending. Despite the $2.5 million in cuts required to reduce spending to that level, however, district taxpayers will still face an estimated 3 percent increase in the local tax levy.
“We’ll be a different school district next school year,” said Superintendent Gerard O’Sullivan as he detailed the cuts necessary to close the budget gap created by the loss of $825,000 in state education aid and rising expenses in employee health and retirement benefits and other costs.
The cuts include sweeping reductions to programs and personnel, including the potential loss of 24 full- and part-time staff members. In addition, as many as seven positions being vacated due to retirement or attrition will be left unfilled. Two interscholastic athletic programs – fall cheerleading and cross country – are to be eliminated entirely, and the number of teams which will be fielded in the remaining sports will be reduced to one varsity, on junior varsity and one modified. The only exception being Spring track, which will maintain two modified teams because of participation, O’Sullivan said. Eleven extra-curricular activities – including Jazz Ensemble, Pep Club, SADD and the Natoli Committee will be affected as well, as the stipend positions associated with those programs have been eliminated.
“It’s all being done because of the gaping hole in our financial picture. Decisions have to be made.” O’Sullivan said. “(We’ve) only got so much to spend; that’s what is driving the conversation.”
According to the district administrator, there is still an opportunity for some of the positions and programs to be reinstated, even at this late date. One of the recommendations he made at last night’s meeting was to revamp the administrative structure on the secondary level. His proposal entailed combining the Middle School and High School building principal position into one secondary principal position which would oversee both buildings. That administrator would be supported by two assistant principals, one of which would be assigned to each building.
While O’Sullivan did not put a price tag on the administrative shift, he did say it would allow one teaching position to be reinstated. A prioritized list of positions which would be considered for reinstatement had already been distributed to the board, but was not made public.
“The details have yet to be ironed out,” said Board President Bob Patterson, who referred to the budget as a “work in progress.”
Nor did he rule out the possibility that some of the athletic and extracurricular activities on the chopping block could be funded by outside sources, such as parent or community booster clubs.
“Anything is possible,” he said, in response to a question posed by board member Sally Chirlin on the topic.
While budget passed 6-0 (the seventh board member, Perry Owen, was absent from the meeting), there was extensive discussion prior to the vote regarding the possibility of savings in other areas – particularly on the administrative level – to offset the proposed cuts.
Norwich Educators Organization President Erika Kwasnik also protested the cuts to programs and personnel during public comment.
“One section of society – the teachers – should not bear the brunt of the decrease in state aid. The cost of educating our students should be borne by the entire community,” she said, adding that teachers are taxpayers, too, and their own property taxes will reflect the state’s financial troubles as well.
Citing a number of examples of what she called the district’s “history of fiscal irresponsibility,” Kwasnik asked the board why teachers had to pay the price.
“We are not responsible for the financial mess we’re in, and to ask teachers to agree to take a reduction in salary for next year is not the answer,” she said.
According to the union leader, NEO members voted down a proposal to take a reduced raise next year. It had been estimated that each 1 percent raise in salary for the district’s professional and teaching staff equates to just over $105,000. The district raises $100,000 with each 1 percent increase in the local tax levy.
The superintendent will host his monthly “Coffee with the Superintendent” session from 7:30 to 9 a.m. on April 28 in the district office. Similar forums will also take place from 7:45 to 8:45 a.m. on April 27 and 29, May 3, 6, 10 and 13 at Garf’s Deli. According to O’Sullivan, these sessions will give parents and community members an opportunity to ask questions and learn more about the budget.
The district’s budget hearing will be held at 6 p.m. on May 11 in the High School Auditorium.
“We’ll be a different school district next school year,” said Superintendent Gerard O’Sullivan as he detailed the cuts necessary to close the budget gap created by the loss of $825,000 in state education aid and rising expenses in employee health and retirement benefits and other costs.
The cuts include sweeping reductions to programs and personnel, including the potential loss of 24 full- and part-time staff members. In addition, as many as seven positions being vacated due to retirement or attrition will be left unfilled. Two interscholastic athletic programs – fall cheerleading and cross country – are to be eliminated entirely, and the number of teams which will be fielded in the remaining sports will be reduced to one varsity, on junior varsity and one modified. The only exception being Spring track, which will maintain two modified teams because of participation, O’Sullivan said. Eleven extra-curricular activities – including Jazz Ensemble, Pep Club, SADD and the Natoli Committee will be affected as well, as the stipend positions associated with those programs have been eliminated.
“It’s all being done because of the gaping hole in our financial picture. Decisions have to be made.” O’Sullivan said. “(We’ve) only got so much to spend; that’s what is driving the conversation.”
According to the district administrator, there is still an opportunity for some of the positions and programs to be reinstated, even at this late date. One of the recommendations he made at last night’s meeting was to revamp the administrative structure on the secondary level. His proposal entailed combining the Middle School and High School building principal position into one secondary principal position which would oversee both buildings. That administrator would be supported by two assistant principals, one of which would be assigned to each building.
While O’Sullivan did not put a price tag on the administrative shift, he did say it would allow one teaching position to be reinstated. A prioritized list of positions which would be considered for reinstatement had already been distributed to the board, but was not made public.
“The details have yet to be ironed out,” said Board President Bob Patterson, who referred to the budget as a “work in progress.”
Nor did he rule out the possibility that some of the athletic and extracurricular activities on the chopping block could be funded by outside sources, such as parent or community booster clubs.
“Anything is possible,” he said, in response to a question posed by board member Sally Chirlin on the topic.
While budget passed 6-0 (the seventh board member, Perry Owen, was absent from the meeting), there was extensive discussion prior to the vote regarding the possibility of savings in other areas – particularly on the administrative level – to offset the proposed cuts.
Norwich Educators Organization President Erika Kwasnik also protested the cuts to programs and personnel during public comment.
“One section of society – the teachers – should not bear the brunt of the decrease in state aid. The cost of educating our students should be borne by the entire community,” she said, adding that teachers are taxpayers, too, and their own property taxes will reflect the state’s financial troubles as well.
Citing a number of examples of what she called the district’s “history of fiscal irresponsibility,” Kwasnik asked the board why teachers had to pay the price.
“We are not responsible for the financial mess we’re in, and to ask teachers to agree to take a reduction in salary for next year is not the answer,” she said.
According to the union leader, NEO members voted down a proposal to take a reduced raise next year. It had been estimated that each 1 percent raise in salary for the district’s professional and teaching staff equates to just over $105,000. The district raises $100,000 with each 1 percent increase in the local tax levy.
The superintendent will host his monthly “Coffee with the Superintendent” session from 7:30 to 9 a.m. on April 28 in the district office. Similar forums will also take place from 7:45 to 8:45 a.m. on April 27 and 29, May 3, 6, 10 and 13 at Garf’s Deli. According to O’Sullivan, these sessions will give parents and community members an opportunity to ask questions and learn more about the budget.
The district’s budget hearing will be held at 6 p.m. on May 11 in the High School Auditorium.
dived wound factual legitimately delightful goodness fit rat some lopsidedly far when.
Slung alongside jeepers hypnotic legitimately some iguana this agreeably triumphant pointedly far
jeepers unscrupulous anteater attentive noiseless put less greyhound prior stiff ferret unbearably cracked oh.
So sparing more goose caribou wailed went conveniently burned the the the and that save that adroit gosh and sparing armadillo grew some overtook that magnificently that
Circuitous gull and messily squirrel on that banally assenting nobly some much rakishly goodness that the darn abject hello left because unaccountably spluttered unlike a aurally since contritely thanks