http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20121116/THISJUSTIN/711169941
School budget cuts looming in Springfield
By Christian Avard
Staff Writer | November 16,2012
SPRINGFIELD — The Springfield School District has a tough road ahead: It must approve a balanced budget for Town Meeting Day without going over the state-mandated threshold for per pupil spending.
School district administrators presented preliminary budget numbers at a joint meeting between the Springfield School Board and budget committee on Tuesday.
Superintendent of Schools Frank Perotti said the committee was tasked by the School Board to start the budget process early.
The school district requested $30.2 million for fiscal year ’14, a $2.6 million increase or 9.4 percent from this year’s budget of $27.6 million. An increase was requested to keep up with several costs related to education, health care, teacher’s salaries and construction projects.
Although the school district is requesting more money for next year, it faces another dilemma. The proposed budget would put the school district’s spending over the state’s excess per pupil spending limit.
According to Perotti, if a district exceeds the excess spending threshold, it must pay double the tax rate. The threshold is set at 125 percent of the prior year’s state average per pupil spending.
The state’s average education spending for the current year is $12,365 per pupil. According to Steve Hier, Springfield School District business manager, the proposed budget would be $15,456 per pupil, which is $3,091 more than the state’s average.
To meet the threshold, Perotti and Hier said the school district would need to cut $1.7 million in school services. All schools in the district would be affected by the budget cuts.
The Springfield School District is comprised of Elm Hill Primary School, Union Elementary School, Riverside Middle School, Springfield High School and special education programs.
Elm Hill Primary School could face $226,250 in budget cuts according to the proposal. Those could include cuts in technology equipment such as laptops, purchasing PCs instead of Macs and no wireless Internet access. In addition a full-time teacher and a full-time instructional coach could be cut along with team leaders, consultants and supplemental reading materials.
Union Elementary could face $184,700 in budget cuts. Those could include laptops cuts, curriculum cuts and purchasing PCs instead of Macs. Staffing cuts could include eliminating team leaders, an instructional coach and full- and part-time teachers.
Riverside Middle School could face $133,000 in budget cuts. Those could include two part-time teachers, a quarter-time library clerk, a part-time nurse, department chairs, instructional equipment, sports and curriculum work.
Springfield High School could face $47,000 in budget cuts. Those could include a reduction in technology equipment, a quarter-time teacher and curriculum work.
Other cost reductions could include $14,950 in special education, $883,000 in deferred capital projects and $225,600 in miscellaneous costs such as technology programs, pre-K tuition, substitute pay increases and a full-time behavioral coordinator.
Perotti emphasized the numbers were preliminary and subject to change. The budget was turned back over to the budget committee who will go over the numbers and make recommendations.
“Here in lies the challenge for the budget committee and the School Board,” Perotti said. “This has been a challenge more difficult than in recent years. There is a great deal of work ahead and the outcome is of extreme importance as the effects on our education community will be felt for a long time.”
The budget committee’s next meeting is Nov. 26.
If the town officials actually CLOSED Park Street school, how much would that save the taxpayers?????
ReplyDeleteProbably more money than we realize or being told. Oh, thats right, we weren't told.
Actually you were told, its a net wash no savings...it was in the Committee Report.
Deleteyou see John, the problem was we just didn't have enough in the budget for a committee to form a committee to talk with this committee about the report, so we're sorry if you didn't get a copy untill after the vote
Deletebudget proposal at:
Deletehttp://www.ssdvt.org/attachments/category/90/Proposed%20FY14%20Budget%20dated%2011-13-12.pdf
SAT Prep is being taught by english teachers, I heard. How many english teachers they got there? Social studies classes with 4 pupils? paid sabbatical for one english teacher, and running classes with 4 pupils? Looks like they could cut more teachers there and not at Union where my kid goes.
DeleteFirst things first. Fire the school board and the "budget" committee. Proposing a 9.4 percent increase is sheer lunacy especially at a time of economic turmoil. What are these clowns smokin? The fact that Springfield spends way more than the average Vermont school does not disturb anyone? The fact that the Springfield School System continues to fail? The fact that Frankie Boy has been here 5 years and the best thing that the school system can produce are Mr. Potato Heads for graduates? How about that football team and coach or lack of both? Get the broom out and do a clean sweep of these clowns before they do any more damage and cost everyone a lot more money.
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't surprise me at all that Springfield spends more per pupil than most other schools. Have you seen the people that reproduce in this town?
Deletelol the demographic excuse.
DeleteAnon 7:00; Watch the board meeting and look at the actual proposal on district site. Its about a 3% increase not 9%. Two budgets were presented to the board. The actual budget request by Administrators was a 3.4% increase.
DeleteClean sweep of all the admin?
Deletecost per student=15000 wow you could go to college for that price and get a degree that you can use.
ReplyDeleteDue to the high poverty level in Springfield its cost per pupil is high. Children from poor families often lack the support, food, secure housing they need to be successful in school. Because of this it falls on the school system to provide services beyond its traditional scope. Also, due to these factors many children need additional services that cost a significant amount of money.
DeleteIf you want to lower the per pupil spending, improve the economics of the town. Bring in business that not only lower the grand list, but also bring in employees that are paid a good wage, that will attract middle class families.
The school district is not the only one at fault here, the town leadership, or lack thereof, shares the blame for not improving the economics of our community. But don't worry, the town budget will pass in March like it always does...
Why does being poor require children to "need additional services"? If the government is handing over section 8 funds and food stamps to these "poor" people then why are the schools spending tens of thousands per year to feed these children? The parents have food stamps why don't they pack their child's lunch and feed them a breakfast (neither is that expensive if you're creative). I guess I'm just to realistic to realize that poor does not equal disadvantaged.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Deletespeak up FormerLiberal WE NEED YOU
DeleteUh, you could get a third rate college degree for that price...but probably not in Vermont...
Delete@ axlerod 5:19 but you can't get a grade school education here for that amount, I'd rather go to a third rate college than a third grade goat pen.
Deleteare you a shill or something ? the point is EVERY amount you give the current school system is going to be mis-spent. An increase is just more than the tax payers can afford.
If you can't get it together. SHUT IT DOWN
15000 a year and you could only go to a third rate college? for 25000 you can send your children to vermont acadamey and receive finacial aid to help.
DeleteCould we just send all our kids to VA? Would they take all the kids?
DeleteI doubt they would take your kid.
DeleteYou're making my point.
DeleteListen folks, this is serious. A 9.4% increase? Seriously??? I can barely keep ahead of my taxes now. Do they not understand that they truly are placing the burden of all this mess on the few actual taxpayers in this town? Please, please, please vote "NO" on any increase. We simply can not afford it. And please do not say "But it's for the children." It's not for the children. It's just spend, spend, spend. Enough already!
ReplyDeleteAnother armchair quarterback in the wings, huh? Did you watch the board meeting? Obviously not.
DeleteTwo budgets where shown. One from the administration on a needs based budget. Administration seems to get the situation in town, so they also presented another budget with a bunch of hard cuts to get it under the so called excess spending threshold that further kicks the can down the road.
You want to mad? Be mad at the State and Federal mandate that says we HAVE to educate children that don't want an education and their parents don't care. There are things that are Federal and State LAW that have to be spent on. Be mad at town leaders that let the welfare people stay in town, doing or dealing drugs and sending kids with hard issues to school for the schools to deal with...because they HAVE to. It's LAW. Want a lower budget? Clean out the trash. Get rid of the slum lords and bark at the town leaders.
When everyone cries cut! cut! cut! it's the local stuff for the local kids that goes. If you are going to be mad and whine, be mad and whine at the right people: Town, State and Federal leadership, not the schools that have to follow the law.
Must be a school board member or school employee. Or better yet, perhaps you are one of the many losers who suck our system dry. Armchair quarterback in the wings (and interestingly you're posting as anonymous too)? I think not. You are just a bloviating, vitriolic shill. What I need to know is what any increase is going to cost ME and how it's going to affect my family!!!!!!! I agree with you. Get rid of the trash in town. I'm all for that but that is just a pipe dream. Spring-Ding has become the dumping ground for the entire state. Regardless of your stance on the issue, you can not keep throwing money at a problem and expecting it's going to fix it. Remember the definition of insanity: "Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result."
DeleteRight don't address the points raised, just launch a personal attack...even against an Anon post. This is why anonymous posting doesn't work. Too many people want to raise a ruckus and not discuss the issue. Anon 10:24...your post was the most useless empty reply I have seen all day. Thanks!
DeleteAnon 12:07 PM. I think you have just taken the lead for the most useless post. Complaining about posting anonymously while doing the same. Attacking other anonymous posters with nonsense just because others here disagree with your foolish defensive opinions shows how desperate you are. "This is why anonymous posting doesn't work". Well stop posting anonymously, fool. Posting anonymously allows people to freely voice their thoughts and opinions without fear of retribution by those that can't handle the truth.
Delete@ anonynous 12:07: Thanks for thinking my post was the most useless, empty reply you've seen all day. Apparently it had an impact because you felt the overwhelming need to reply. You're welcome! @ anonymous 12:39-I could not have said it better myself. Thank you.
DeleteAll (3?) of you have posted anonymously..stop.. oh wait, me too.. make that (4)
Deleteanybody remember the projects before they were cleaned up. i do. west and south view were scary places. full of i love this term "low income" people. i dont recall them being used as an excuse. must be the teachers and administration were just better at dealing with them.
DeleteHey, let's keep the anonymous posts rolling along. Original post has the figures wrong, as did the article in the paper, the budget proposal was for a 3% increase not 9%
Deletewell you're still hiding.
DeleteI have two children, and pay your taxes.
ReplyDeleteYou are the worst schook system in the ENTIRE COUNTRY per capita....
All of the money, and results worse than an inner city dump
Get a new School Board, FISTICUPS for the LIARS AND THIEVES that
LIE LIE LIE to pad and cushion their jobs.
They think they are better than you. They think they are "educators" and you the "to be educated"
Time to take them out.
Speak up from the inside, their must be a few of you YOUNG GUYS who know the truth and are willing to look past your own salary and correct was has gone wrong here.
STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS
You Gotta FIGHT
FOR YOUR RIGHT
TO................... education..............
If you notice the language of the proposal includes the indication of these extra funds being earmarked to go to other proffesions or outside the school system,, i.e. contstruction.
ReplyDeleteI submit this is done to appeal to a larger voting group and is NOT how the money will be spent later on after you have forgotten about it.
I submit you are an idiot. It means legal fees, search fees, publication costs, etc.
DeleteAETHELRED THE UNREADY
Delete"An increase was requested to keep up with several costs related to education, health care, teacher’s salaries and construction projects"
per the article
paragraph 4
lines 3, 4, and 5
Thanks for calling me an idiot,
kitty boo boo sweets
Facts.....75 percent of schooling costs typically surround the employees of the school system through wages, health care, pensions, other employee benefits and special employee perks. The higher up the totem pole the worse it gets. Time to bring the top portion back down to reality.
Deleteneed a better plan ?
ReplyDeleteget a G.E.D. on your own and go directly to community college.
copy and share this thought.
Damn the Rutland Herald, and the Author for using the word "must"
ReplyDeleteWhy not be a "Precision Valley", defeating Hitler #9, American, Non Socialist, Proper, Sophisticated, not getting publically peed on Town that makes their own decisions.............
Time for a LANDMARK VOTE to overthrow the socialist virus that has infiltrated the COSMOS....
Turn down the School Board. KEEP YOUR TAX MONEY., let the SCHOOLS FAIL.....
we can ALL GO TO COLLEGE for LESS. incuding meals, transportation, books, lodging, and much more.
not to mention if those funds were properly managed in a portfolio run by prudent rules..........
The Springfield Schoool System should be like Harvard or Yale by now, paying for ITSELF
But these people would rather STEAL YOUR MONEY LIKE VAMPIRES....
and first they gotta make sure that there is blood to suck.
Seriously... Springfield, aren't you sick of RUTLAND peeing on your face ?????
Time to tell Rutland, if they want a fight... We'll spare their kind folk and surely out flank their leadership.
Start HERE Springfield. TIME TO FIGHT
Wow are you ignorant. Think if the schools fail it will go away? No, the State steps in and it runs the schools, with YOUR money and YOU get less say than ever!
DeleteThat's the liberal way.
Delete@ 9:52 ignorant ? who are you to even think we'd fail if we could just start out in the right direction for once.
Deleteso, there.
Where do these whiners come from? Do you watch the board meetings before popping off? They presented the needs based budget then they presented an already cut down budget. I'd say they are trying. It still has to go through the budget committee. There just isn't any way to please people...it could be zero dollars and they would still spout about it being too high. So easy to be not involved at all in the process and then broadcast rubbish.
DeleteThey may be "trying" but they're not being realistic for the current climate in Springfield.
Delete@ Anonymous 12:37. I have to agree with JLMachinist. Sadly, an increase, for whatever reason in this current economic climate will be devastating to those of us who pay taxes. That's just the reality of the situation. I know you see it differently, and that's okay.
DeleteThe cuts have to come mainly from Central Office, including Central Office oriented monies tucked away in the budgets of the other schools. I agree we can't afford another rate increase in Springfield. We desperately need to get tha biomass plant under construction along with as many more taxable projects as we can line up.
DeleteThat's right corporate shill. Let's destroy what little is left of the town on a "Save the Schools" theme to convince everyone that eating smoke is the right thing to do. Was not that long ago that a similar ploy was used to allow a prison to be built here. How did that turn out? Maybe a tire recycling plant or a huge automobile junkyard could come next. Either one would be a wonderful tenant for the "Great Hall" of Springfield. They could probably squeeze in a rendering plant or a smelter in there somewhere.
Deletesave the schools / burn the forests
DeleteThey actually posted their budget proposal at:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ssdvt.org/attachments/category/90/Proposed%20FY14%20Budget%20dated%2011-13-12.pdf
I remember in the 70's when Springfield used to laugh at Ludlow for being a poor ghetto town... I guess Ludlow gets the last laugh.
ReplyDeleteThe school system in springfield is big buisness, spring field itself has become a tax payed for social program pit,rehabs-prison-great welfare etc.. so lets bleed the tax payers some more,what the heck most are too ignorant or lazy to vote anyway.
ReplyDeleteIs an inflationary increase in the budget a "bleeding" of the taxpayers?
ReplyDeleteIt isn't based on inflation. Taxes don't need to rise each year. Over-paying the administrators doesn't have to happen either. Bleeding the taxpayers until they finally scream is a common tactic used by those in control. If one's wages are not increasing than raising taxes is extremely painful leaving less money left over for food, shelter, gas and beer.
DeleteWhat do you base your overpay statement on?
Deletework within your means, pc's instead of macs- are you kidding! it takes a school to bankrupt a town
ReplyDeleteSo should the technology be pulled out?
ReplyDeletelet them eat apples
Deleteyes and replace it with common sense
ReplyDeleteYet, they give a teacher a paid sabbatical at the high school? What's going on with the high school never taking the big cuts? Didn't they add the 1/4 teacher after the budget passed last year? That wasn't even in the budget for this year, and they were able to add it. So do they mean 1/4 teacher from the budget we voted on, or the one they added stuff to after?
ReplyDeleteThey are wasting money, in places they aren't proposing to cut. That makes it hard to trust them.
DeleteThey budgeted for a 15 percent increase in health insurance benefits for employees. Isn't it about time to stop this nonsense?
ReplyDeleteYeah, let's just cut everyone's health benefits. Good plan.
ReplyDeleteWhen the tax payers get stuck with this scam on healthcare don't you think they should start to question those that OK the ridiculous increases and the insurance companies that are benefiting from this scam? How many pockets need to be lined with tax payer dollars? When the rise in healthcare premiums is estimated to increase between 3 and 4 percent in 2012 why should we allow the insurance companies and those that promote and pass the ridiculous increases to continue to rape the tax payers? Time to say "No Mas"!!! Most people are being stuck with these additional increases. Are the school employees and especially their administrators paying their fair share?
DeleteI agree that healthcare costs are frustrating, and perhaps we need to look at having school district employees pay a higher percentage of the cost of their benefits. I guess my concern is that each choice has a corresponding effect. The percentage employees pay is on par with the other districts in the state. So, we can just keep adding increased costs to the employees (which would need to be negotiated during the next contract negotiations which only occur every three years) and that will initially feel good. The problem is that quickly has an impact on the quality of the employees you can attract and retain. I am sure that Springfield is already a hard place to attract talent to and this would only make it worse.
ReplyDeleteOf course, that is not a concern, if the quality of the schools are not something that one worries about.
Since it is a competitive world, there are plenty of unemployed teachers that would gladly take their places while receiving far less in perks. Since most employees in the real world are paying more of their own healthcare costs now it is unfair for the tax payers to continue to carry the additional burden of public union employees' healthcare costs. Your worry about impacting the quality of the employees and thus the schools is unfounded. A complete turnover of the administration and the teachers can only improve things since the Springfield School District is already a disaster and won't improve until most of the employees are replaced. Not saying there are not some good teachers there but they are far and few between.
Deleteit takes a school to bankrupt a town
DeleteI am moving back to America
ReplyDelete"A complete turnover of the administration and the teachers can only improve things." I wonder if that is actually true. I understand that it feels good to say "Throw the bums out!", but perhaps there are other possible outcomes that could come from changing every staff member in the schools than improvement. The assumption is that ANYONE is better than the existing people the district employs. That's a big assumption.
ReplyDelete"Since most employees in the real world are paying more of their own healthcare costs now it is unfair for the tax payers to continue to carry the additional burden of public union employees' healthcare costs." Ahh...the real world. My understanding is that in the real world many public employees have negotiated for lower pay than folks who are doing equivalent work with equivalent responsibilities in the private sector. They traded higher level of pay increases for job security (through more laborious processes to remove these employees) and higher percentage of contribution towards benefit programs like healthcare and retirement. In the past this arrangement looked good to taxpayers as the true cost of these benefits were kicked down the road to when more of the baby boomers started to access more health care and to move toward retirement. Now that municipalities are seeing the true cost of the negotiations from the last 40 years, people are balking at the bill. Perhaps in the next negotiation cycle the town should try to change that balance with their employees and shift more of the benefits' burden to the public employees. That will likely come with an across the board pay increases that are well above 5% annually or an ugly prolonged fight with public employees unions who will feel they gave up years of pay increases in order to protect these benefits.
I get that we are angry and embarrassed by what we see as the current outcomes from the schools, but I hope that we can have real world, not oversimplified, dialogue about it. "Throw the bums out!" is not a true strategy to improve the schools. There might be some "bums" who need to go, but they probably aren't the folks we'd identify from the outside.
So, I know that an anonymous set of blog posts (probably written by about 3 people total) does not a community dialogue make, but if this blog was to have actually fact-based balanced conversation...it could help set a constructive tone for the dialogue community needs to have about how to balance the need for good schools with taxpayer burden.
Springfield is indeed in need of "Throwing the bums out!". That means getting rid of the clowns running the town, too. Things have gone way beyond trying to fix things with the same people in control. Your attitude seems to be that it will be difficult to change things so we should do nothing. This isn't just about a few people posting here. There are many that feel the same and I would suggest that they are the majority now. Unfortunately they are still the "silent" majority. Hopefully enough read these blogs and are finally moved toward taking some action.
DeleteI hear your concern with the people working for both the town and the schools. I guess I am just not sure that A) the struggles we see from both groups are purely due to the people who are working these jobs and not due to the difficulty of the jobs themselves, and B) that there are capable, experienced, and cheap replacements who are just waiting for the opening.
DeleteI know you're not saying that every employee should just be fired today. I think your saying that if salaries and benefits were squeezed that people would leave. I guess my concern is that when that happens you tend to lose some of your best and most mobile people (market forces). I worry that is probably not the best way to turn around town services. Anymore than it is a good way to turn around a business.
If you have a business that has failed or failing what happens? Someone usually gains control, fires the idiots running it into the ground, cuts costs and hires some competent management and workers to operate it. Making excuses never works.
DeleteYou mean like the shops in Springfield? We all bitch about the schools, what are the town employees paying for insurance? What % are we taxpayers funding for them?
DeleteWhat are the current outcomes from the schools?
ReplyDeleteThe average American pays a nominal income tax rate of 29% and an actual rate of 20%. The wealthiest pays a nominal rate of 35% and an actual rate of 17%. Mitt Rmoney paid an actual rate of 14%.
ReplyDeleteThe Springfield homeowner (first, not second home, which has a lower rate) will be paying a 2.7% property tax rate, which is one-fifth of the tax rate Rmoney paid. Why are some people so upset at finally getting treated better than one of the richest men in America, especially when what they pay affects how well their own children and grandchildren get educated?
I submit that it is because the property tax rate is the ONLY tax rate they have any influence on. It is so much harder for anyone to get their legislator to act in their behalf (because others contend for contrary goals), but at the town level, they can show the world they have power-- by voting against their own interests. It very often can be very satisfying to spite the system by cutting off one's own nose.
Why not carry the fight to where it ought to be? If the money given back to households in the so-called "Marriage Penalty" tax refund had instead been given to America's public schools, next year's tax bill would be reduced by $6 million rather than raised by $2.6 million. Instead, we ignore that tax refund, and as a result a couple making four times what the average household of four makes gets back 30 times more than that Vermont family.
And how can you fight against that? It's a lot easier to show you have power by voting directly against something good for your kids than to figure out how to challenge and change the system.
Froot Loops!
Delete