NORWICH – The Norwich Board of Education adopted a tentative 2011-12 budget Monday night, totalling $37,090,193. While it represents no increase in spending over the current year’s budget, funding the spending plan will require an estimated 1.87 percent increase in the local property tax levy. The district will also apply $1,729,573 from its undesignated fund to mitigate a further tax increase or additional cuts.
A resolution to adopt the tentative budget carried with a vote of 5 to 2, with Joe Stagliano, Tom Morrone, Dr. Linda Horovitz, Perry Owen and Heather Fredenburg voting in favor. Sally Chirlin and Priscilla Johnson cast the dissenting votes.
While the board adopted the total dollar amount of the budget and the associated impact on the local tax levy, the details of the spending plan are still a work in progress.
According to Fredenburg, the board will continue to review the cuts proposed by Superintendent Gerard O’Sullivan in the coming weeks.
“There is a lot out on the table,” she said, listing a number of items which need to be discussed. Those topics included Race to the Top; the district’s administrative structure; the 2011-12 schedule; Advanced Placement opportunities; and compliance with state education department mandates.
As currently proposed, the budget includes myriad cuts, primarily in staffing. The tentative plan presented by O’Sullivan last week called for the elimination of 32 positions, 25 of which will be vacated through retirement or resignation. Seven additional jobs were also slated to be cut, two others will be reduced to part-time and secretarial hours will be “realigned” under the plan.
Last night, Deputy Superintendent Rob Wightman said 7.5 of the positions being vacated by resignation and retirement will be filled – three of the elementary positions, a music teacher, a physical education teacher, 1.5 science teachers and a technology teacher.
“At the end of this, there are only two teachers that are going to be laid off,” he reported.
Other cuts will include a roughly 20 percent reduction of maintenance and supply budgets across the board; a 5.3 percent reduction in athletic spending, including the elimination of freshman boys’ basketball and one of the cheerleading teams; and a 4.6 percent reduction in expenditures on marching/field band and the high school and middle school musicals.
An additional $340,515 will be shaved by reducing academic field trips; eliminating a computer technician position provided by the Broome Tioga BOCES; limiting weekend use of the school buildings; eliminating department chairperson positions on the secondary level; cutting the district’s elementary summer school program; and discontinuing use of DCMO BOCES’ instructional support services.
The administrative side of the budget will be reduced as well, with a 2.1 percent reduction in board of education spending; 1.42 percent decrease in operations and maintenance; .7 percent decrease in transportation expenses, largely through consolidation of bus runs; and a 2.6 percent reduction in debt service.
At the same time, BOCES expenditures are slated to increase 2.1 percent, as a result of more students enrolling in CTE courses and the New Visions program.
Even with these cuts, the $186,000 increase in the tax levy and the restoration of $164,519 in state aid, the district will need to dip into its reserves to close the remainder of the budget gap, according to Wightman.
“This is a very slippery slope,” he said, describing it as “one shot revenue.”
The use of $1,729,573 of these “rainy day” funds will leave the district with approximately $3.7 million in unallocated reserves. According to O’Sullivan, this is below the 4 percent figure districts are legally allowed to have on hand.
He and Wightman warned that if similar amounts are applied in the future, the district could face bankruptcy within three years.
Prior to the budget presentation and subsequent vote, community and faculty members as well as students voiced concerns during public comment. So many, in fact, that the board elected to extend the period from its usual 30 minutes to accommodate all those who wished to speak. Many of those who spoke lobbied for individual positions to be reinstated – in the English, math, foreign language, art and music departments, as well as the high school hall monitor and a library media position.
Norwich High School student John Antonowicz expressed dismay about the district’s plan to move away from semestered scheduling.
Beth Nassar stressed that the district should be committed to providing a quality education, rather than merely meeting state requirements.
“This is where I think we have gone wrong,” she said, “defining our focus by minimalistic goals promoted by the state that do not prepare our students for what lies ahead of them.”
Fred Gee once again asked the board to look more closely at the administrative side of the budget.
“The public can only vote on what you decide. You must act as leaders and present a budget worthy of public support,” he said. “Unfortunately, the proposed budget as it stands is not worthy of that support.”
Former school board president Bob Patterson also spoke during public comment, asking that the board be sensitive to those in the community who live on a fixed budget.
“The governor’s message was no new taxes,” he said, asking that the Norwich board deliver the same.
David Older echoed a similar sentiment, explaining that he’s compared Norwich with similarly sized districts, all of which spend less per student while achieving better academic results.