http://rutlandherald.com/article/20131126/NEWS02/711269928
Published November 26, 2013 in the Rutland Herald Springfield school budget up 3.2 percent By SUSAN SMALLHEER Staff Writer SPRINGFIELD — The proposed 2014-15 Springfield school budget of $29 million reflects a 3.2 percent increase. The budget, which was released last week by school officials, includes an increase of $909,959, which Steve Hier, director of financial services for the school district, said Monday was attributed to increases in special education tuition, health care costs, as well as a 2.5 percent increase in support staff salaries. The current year’s budget is $28,127,379, he said. Hier said the budget also includes a projected increase for teaching staff and administration. He said that all staff had been asked to level-fund discretionary funding, such as supplies, “which they did.” But he said a large increase is the $178,000 hike in health care coverage, which reflects a 4.5 percent increase. The school district is a member of the Vermont Education Health Initiative, which contracts with Blue Cross Blue Shield of Vermont. The district spends a total of $3.2 million on health care for its employees, he said. Another big increase comes from an increase in tuition rates, as well as an increased number of students receiving out-of-district special education programs. Costs have more than doubled, from $155,000 to $335,000, he said. He said in one case the town school district was now responsible for paying for out-of-district tuition costs that had been earlier paid for by the state since the children in question were in state custody, and includes payments to school programs at the Brattleboro Retreat and the Kindle Farm in Newfane, among others. He said a negotiated 2.5 percent increase for support staff will cost $77,000, and he had included a $150,000 reserve to cover projected increases in teaching and administration. The current three-year contract expires in June 2014, he said. The Springfield School Board has adopted a slightly different review process, Hier said, with small groups made up of a School Board member, an administration official, and a budget committee member going over certain areas of the budget in December. The small groups will eventually result in a budget review process, starting in January, he said. “The board and our local board will review it together,” he said. He said budget sessions are currently slated for Jan. 9, 13, 16 and 21, he said. “The idea grew out of some discomfort that things were being done twice,” he said. The school budget committee currently only has four members, he said, and former Chairman Ernest “Puggy” Lamphere has resigned.
Year After Year...here we go again! Why is it that nobody realizes that you can do more with less money. This is crazy
ReplyDeleteI would just like to say why don't the kids start going for four days a week because every other week there is a "teacher in-service" or "half day" reason. This has gotten way out of hand! Start sending the kids everyday and make the teachers actually work 5 days a week then by cutting down the length of the school year it will cut down on so much unnecessary costs. They have stretched the school year out so long now it is ridiculous! Twice a month they have some dumb excuse why they need another day off. If they want more days off then make them work longer week days to actually earn the time they are getting paid for. I have a daughter who goes to Union St School and I have had enough of all these days off she gets. Plus the teachers really only work 3/4 of the year and still get paid for the full year. Granted I know it is a hard profession to deal with everyone's kids but c'mon man! One more thing... wasn't selling East School suppose to alleviate some of these costs??? Where is the savings? There are only two elementary schools left here but the taxes still go up every time. When I was just in school 20 years ago there was 4 and the taxes were not even close to what they are now. Wake up Springfield it is just another way we are getting fleeced out of our money.
ReplyDeleteWell said couldn't agree more. The werl off followed by an in service or half day the following week is beyond ridiculous! !!!
DeleteThe rule of "ups" , every year .....:
ReplyDelete1) School Taxes will go up.
2) Insurance cost will go up.
3) Teachers salary's will go up.
4) Electrical bills will go up.
5) Phone / internet ect costs will go up.
6) Income taxes will go up.
These things will never never go down.
The rule of "down" every year.......:
Delete1) My bank account.
2) My retirement savings.
3) The school budget!
I agree with the kids having to much time off!! We never had this much time off back when I was in school! While the budget and taxes go up ever year there is ................more that the kids loose! When are the parents and tax payers going to put a stop to this bull!!! School lunches are to high priced and the kids don't like the food! There are a lot of things that need to be looked into and revamped!
ReplyDeleteFolks, take heart. The projected 3.2% increase is BEFORE THE BUDGET REVIEW PROCESS. Once the review process is complete, rest assured they'll be asking for 5% or more -- due to further unanticipated increases resulting from the effects of Obamacare, Special Ed, and Staff Support.
ReplyDeleteThe good news: Perennial taxaholic and former Chairman of the Budget Committee, Ernest “Puggy” Lamphere, has resigned. Otherwise the recommended increase would likely approach 10%!
I bet the teachers are getting the PLATINUM plan.. The best BCBSVT has to offer. Also very expensive. Plus I bet the teachers and admin are giving themselves a big fat raise.
ReplyDeleteA little, NO a lot out of control. Next year the same BS.
Finally I agree with the governer of this state, he said this am that towns should try NOT to make an increase in the "budget(s)".
It's time to give the teachers and administrators alike a dose of their own progressive minded medicine and send them all off to the Obamacare exchanges where they can reap (and pay for) what they have sown. Same with all municipal employees.
ReplyDeleteYour anger is justified but misplaced. The outrage isn't a paltry 3% increase in the school budget. The outrage is the fact that you can't afford a 3% increase. The global economy has effectively left many of you in the dust. This may not have occurred to you while you were whooping it up over Monday Night Football or tracking that 8 pointer, but capital investment isn't coming to Springfield because, frankly, few of you have the training, ambition, or skills that would attract it. Your fate is the fate of many blue collar communities across the mid-west. You think Springfield is in Vermont, but in actuality we're somewhere between Cleveland and West Virginia. Smarten up people. The school district isn't the cause of your problems.
ReplyDelete"few of you have the training, ambition, or skills that would attract it" - should we thank a teacher for this?
Deleteteachers can't teach if parents don't parent.
DeleteQuite correct, 6:06! People who focus on the Patrick Henry Red Sox (Boston doesn't own them; a hedge fund manager does) and don't pay attention to such things as NAFTA or its latest manifestation, the TPP (if you don't know what that stands for, you're likely to be blindsided by it) naturally tend to focus their anger on the wrong thing, in this case a rise in my school tax which will be about $1.80.
DeleteChuck, you failed to complete the math. Now multiply that number by the hundred value of your home, its not a 1.80 anymore is it. Add in higher insurance premiums, higher food cost, increased value added taxes (like those little hidden "pennies" on your phone bill). Included expected higher town taxes, state taxes and personal income taxes. This is not only a Springfield problem but one that exist in every town nationwide.
DeleteI don't care who owns the Boston Red Sox. On the other hand we can thank our government for NAFTA and TPP. The Red Sox make money by producing a product that folks want to spend on, personally I don't give them a dime and I don't have to watch or cheer for them. The government on the other hand says I will be part of NAFTA and TPP. None of this relates to the school system unless they plan on producing future politicians that make better decisions. You on the other hand give government a pass while blasting that one percent you so hate. Wake up buddy, they're all in bed together!
The problem here is that the public sector is once again asking for more. Well as the writer here labels the low life, low wage, beer drinkers with poor parenting skills just don't know how they can give anymore. So they look at a teacher driving a new car and dressed nicely (nothing wrong with that) and compare it to their dented up vehicle missing hubcaps and a wiper blade, while walking around wearing the one pair of Family Dollar blue jeans they have and winter coat found at SEVCA, wondering why teachers need more when they are doing just fine with what they have. Look around that is Springfield these days.
Last summer Chuck you were going to change the face of Springfield. Everyone was going to rally behind your liberal ideals, put up a few signs with new catch phrases and get a new attitude about things. How's that working out? I think you should run for school or select board and start changing things from the inside, needless to say you would have to get elected first. My guess is that the voting results would send a clear message to you about how folks agree with your thinking. Of course maybe you can educate us.
My property taxes were about $1500 last year; a 3.2% increase in that is about $45, but only part of that is for the school budget. I agree with you that people who don't have much resent a system that allows people with more education and more opportunities to thereby earn more money, but they are cutting off their nose to spite their face-- or rather, in this case, ruining the chances their children might have to surpass their own lot in life.
DeleteEvery professional major sports team except the Green Bay Packers goes to the public trough for its stadium, and taxpayers almost invariably and foolishly fork it over. Be glad you don't live in Boston.
As for changing the face of Springfield, you must have mistaken me for someone else.
Re: "be glad you don't live in Boston"
DeleteChuck, if we pay for something I'd be glad, it was worth it. The Red Sox, Patriots and Celtics are all very good teams. Springfield education system? Yeah no so much
Maybe a change in leadership?
ReplyDeleteThis might be a facetious comment, but this is exactly what is needed. Are people done with the kiss their-feet-fan-club for the administrators who came in as a group, and took over the district essentially? Have they helped our town? Do they live in this town? Hmmmm.... People who vote for this budget are a bunch of jackwagons.
DeleteMaking decisions without consulting the school board, and parents. Just trying to pad their own resumes, using Springfield as their stepping stone. How's about getting administrators that actually live in the district, and pay taxes.
DeleteThe major issue I see is that even if we vote no they will have a re vote until it passes.
ReplyDeleteVote until it passes the dummies only vote once at least that's seems the practice in Springfield so keep voting as they wish and do it the first time you just don't understand remember God knows we have been told that enough.
DeleteKeep voting, if they have a revote, then vote again till they get the message that aministrators have to be held accountable for their actions. Yes, education is improtant, we all get that! But sensible budgets for Springfield need to be in order, start timming, start looking into contacts of the staff, and support staff...all the miss time. It is out of hand, take it from an employee that works for the district!
DeleteThe biomass plant's construction and ensuing operation would expand the tax base sufficiently to offset this budget increase, and that ain't blowin' smoke!
ReplyDeleteSpringfield - doing its part to help Vermont achieve a #1 ranking!
ReplyDelete10 Least Tax-Friendly States for Retirees
#2 Vermont
Jessamyn West via Creative Commons
State Income Tax: 3.55% to 8.95%
State Sales Tax: 6%
Estate Tax/Inheritance Tax: Yes/No
Prepare to pay lofty taxes if you retire in the Green Mountain State. Vermont taxes most retirement income. Social Security benefits are taxed to the same extent as they are by the federal government—up to 85%.
In addition to the state sales tax, local jurisdictions may add 1%. Food, clothing, prescription and nonprescription drugs are exempt. You'll pay 9% on prepared foods, restaurant meals and lodging, and 10% if you order a glass of wine or beer in a restaurant.
Vermont's property taxes are the eighth-highest in the U.S., according to the Tax Foundation. Median property tax on a $216,300 median-valued home is $3,444. Real estate taxes have two components: school property tax and municipal property tax. Both taxes are billed and collected by the town or city where the real estate is located. A statewide education tax is imposed on all nonresidential and homestead property. There are no property tax breaks specifically for seniors; however, residents with income of less than $99,000 may be eligible for a rebate of their school and municipal property taxes. The maximum adjustment is $8,000.
Vermont taxes estates that exceed $2.75 million. The maximum estate-tax rate is 16%. Assets left to a surviving spouse are exempt.
Read more at http://www.kiplinger.com/slideshow/retirement/T006-S001-10-least-tax-friendly-states-for-retirees/index.html?cid=32#OrWOpE0CU1IydDk9.99