New Haven Independent

$179M “Bare Bones” Budget Approved

by Allan Appel | March 11, 2008 8:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (17)

nhiboemarch10%20001.JPG The Board of Ed approved a new budget with a 3.6 percent increase.

The $179.5 million fiscal ‘08-‘09 budget approved at Monday night’s meeting was described as bare-bones, “maintenance only.”

The mayor has budgeted a few bucks less for education, but the BOE hopes — and expects — no fight with the alders or City Hall as the budget comes up for approval. Board members said that’s because they’re all lobbying like mad for more bucks from a common and, they say, a short-changing foe, the State of Connecticut.

A full 93 percent of the BOE’s budget is fixed, with nearly two thirds of those fixed costs being the general wage increases of teachers and other contractual obligations, explained Chief Operating Officer Will Clark in his recommendations to the board. (He’s pictured here in tie that just happens to match the cover of the budget document, with schools communication chief Catherine Sullivan DeCarlo.)

“So there is very little wiggle room,” he said.

The 3.6% percent increase, which adds up to about $6 million, derives primarily from scheduled salary increases for personnel of about $4.7 million. Of that amount $2.9 million are teachers’ salaries, and the balance principals, security, custodian, paraprofessional and other personnel. “Everyone gets an increase,” said Clark. Most are in the 3 to 4 percent range.”

However the budget document reveals that part-time personnel, including people such as substitutes and coaches, received no increases at all.

The other two major fixed-cost “drivers” of the $6 million increase are a projected increase of $505,000 for school bus transportation and about a $640,000 increase in utilities, for gas, electricity, and heating fuel. The transportation increase derives from escalations in the five-year contract negotiated six months ago with First Student, which transports 17,000 New Haven students, a growing number going longer distances to and from the city’s magnet schools. Then, of course, the costs of gas and all energy have gone up dramatically.

“One of our system’s signal achievements,” Clark added, “is that our cost controls for energy are exceptionally good, and without them and our centralized energy systems, the costs in this area, especially with our increased square footage with new schools, would have been far higher.”

Superintendent Reginald Mayo described the spending plan as modest, “with absolutely no fat.”

A closer look at the full-time personnel budget lines shows only one dramatic increase on the executive staff line of $178,265. That represents, Clark said, four senior staff salary increases, but the largest chunk is the entire salary of Sue Weisselberg , the schools construction coordinator. Heretofore her fees were treated as those of a consultant and were largely reimbursed by the state. The state has disallowed that, so she was transferred to a regular city budget line.

The state has also cut $2.3 million from the city’s Early Reading Success program, which represents literacy coaches in some 19 schools in grades K-3 and 10 paraprofessionals to support instruction in the kindergarten and the first grade. Because schools with these services demonstrated among the city’s largest strides in the third grade CMTs, the board and city are lobbying vigorously for its restoration, along with restoration of interdistrict magnet funding. Because these determinations are not usually finalized until the General Assembly in Hartford in May, the process, Mayo said, is like a roller coaster.

Clark said he is confident that Early Reading Success would be restored, because it has the vigorous support of the state’s commissioner of education. If it isn’t, the Board would work with the city, he said, to find the funds. “We have a budget here that gives the schools what they need to continue our good work and our momentum, and we will try to ensure that.”

nhiboemarch10%20006.JPG Board members have been meeting with Clark and staff for weeks on the budget numbers; during Monday’s meeting, their questions seemed few, but incisive. M. Ann Levett asked Clark about the $1.4 million budgeted for custodial overtime. Clark said that was monitored daily; he has meetings scheduled this week with the unions to see if that could be rendered more efficient. “But we are on or below budget,” he said, “to date.”

Board member Frances Padilla (pictured above with Chair Brian Perkins) asked about the $10.6 million of fixed “other contractual” costs, and specifically how much of that was represented by Aramark. Clark told her the answer was $1.2 million, reflecting facilities and custodial work, but not food, which was a different account.

Next Up: Aldermen

The 2008-2009 budget recommendations were passed unanimously as part of the superintendent’s report. The next step is for the Board of Ed to make its case before the Board of Aldermen’s Finance Committee. “We’ve been working collegially on this for months,” said Clark, “with the city’s budget offices, and, remember, the biggest player in this, the state, is still deliberating.”

If the state restores ECS and the other programs the Board of Ed is lobbying for, that would reconcile the BOE’s request and the mayor’s.

nhiboemarch10%20005.JPG Communications chief DeCarlo called the school spending plan not only bare bones, but “soup bones,” a Depression-era budget. The budget was approved the same night the public hearing room was festooned with some 200 pieces of student art work, including award winners, at the grand opening of the annual New Haven Public School visual arts student show. “Mr. Superintendent,” DeCarlo said to Mayo, “if we do run into budget problems, we can sell the pieces of art.”

She was joking.

Share this story

Share |

Comments

Posted by: cedarhillresident | March 11, 2008 8:45 AM

I know what I want to say but I will let someone else comment on this..

Posted by: Esbe | March 11, 2008 11:06 AM

A 3.6% increase is completely flat in real terms -- that is, it just compensates for inflation so that "real spending" stays about the same. Indeed, considering the rate of increases in energy and health care costs, it might be a slight decrease in real terms.

Posted by: Gary Doyens | March 11, 2008 1:23 PM

The Easthaven mayor took a red marker to that city's school budget and showed them where to make cuts, what expenditures were inefficient. She went on to recommend only a $750,000 increase which was basically the difference between the efficiences she found and what the schools needed for operations.

She noted in her budget that spending in the schools as elsewhere in the city should be brought in line, and kept in line with the public's ability to pay. Interesting concept in light of our projected property tax hike of 11.1%.

How many special assignment teachers remain on the payroll? What about consultants who are not paid with specific grant funds? How many double dippes are there - those who have retired and are drawing a pension and who now hold "consultant" positions? Have any positions been cut, programs ended that are not working or have no metric for measuring success? Patronage jobs?

Posted by: FIX THE SCHOOLS | March 11, 2008 4:02 PM

Tomorrow night at the BOA meeting, will there be any aldermen who will ask some of the following questions?

- How does NHPS measure it's performance, both educationally and fiscally?

- Has NHPS identified a group of peer districts with which to measure educational and financial performance?

- How does NHPS compare to other urban districts in operating costs per pupil? How about fully loaded with facilities debt service?

- How does NHPS rank with it's peers in spending when compared to district educational performance?

- Are there any districts that serve as good examples of fiscal and educational management?

- What percentage of the budget is spent on administrative or non-classroom expenses? How does it compare to it's peer group?

- Would NHPS be in favor of adopting a common chart of accounts across all districts, which would bring transparency to the budget process and allow helpful peer comparisons?

- If teacher salaries are the largest part of the budget, what steps were taken during the last contract negotiation to contain rising costs?

- What professional accountabilities do teachers have right now? How about Principals? How many teachers or principals have been removed (not reassigned)for poor performance over the last three years?

- Why does everyone in the system get an increase of 3-4% Are there performance measures tied to these raises? How does a 3-4% increase compare with the rate of inflation in CT.? What is the average increase in New Haven taxpayers salaries?

- How long will it take, and how much money will be spent before the majority of NHPS students are performing at their respective goal levels?

Posted by: Fedupwithliberals | March 11, 2008 4:19 PM

I got a novel idea! How about a 3.6% decrease?

Posted by: cedarhillresident | March 11, 2008 4:42 PM

Gary Doyens

Took the words out of my mouth! DITTO on Garys post!! Lets get real...we know it they know it and guess what "people yes all people not just one" in an ELECTED position need to cut this alot more.

Posted by: darnell | March 11, 2008 5:08 PM

Fix the Schools,

Do you have the answers to the questions you posted? I would like to see them.

Posted by: FIX THE SCHOOLS | March 11, 2008 6:02 PM

No clue.

But rest assured that the aldermen will carry out their responsibilities for budget oversight by getting the answers to these questions, right?

Posted by: jeffreykerekes | March 11, 2008 8:09 PM

In an absolutely no fat budget, perhaps someone can explain to me what the following line items are. Please note, these page numbers correspond to the PDF version of the budget.

For Education, in the sections listing positions, who is or what does "Systemwide" do?

p.144 system wide $180,000
p.155 systemwide $40,000
p.144 systemwide $112,000
p.169 sysw $130335 and $43,746

total: $505,746

Also, what is this?

p.144 reimb spfunds $250,000.

Is this padding in the budget?

Posted by: jeffreykerekes | March 11, 2008 8:17 PM

Another issue is of concern when looking at the Education Budget.

On page 88 of the current 07/08 budget (hard copy), BOE department 900, line item 50130 (over time) is $1,975.450

On page 81 of the proposed 08/09 budget (hard copy), BOE department 900, They have omitted line item 50130 (over time).

This omission represents a significant difference of at least $1,975.450 to the overall bottom line which is on pg. 81 (bottom) of the page. Is this omission deliberate? Do they plan on hitting us up for it later as an overrun or was it fat in last year's budget?

Posted by: Darnell | March 12, 2008 8:09 AM

Fix the Schools,

Agreed, if they tell the truth.

Posted by: jeffreykerekes | March 12, 2008 9:08 AM

I mistyped some of the pages since they are different in the PDF version and the print version. The total amount is the same, but I have updated the page references.

I do want to call your attention to the following items in the BOE budget.

Position 9622 "systemwide" $180,000 (PDF p.144, Hardcopy p. 130)
Position 9621 "systemwide" $40,000 (PDF p.155, Hardcopy p.141)
Position 9640 "systemwide" $112,000 (PDF p.158, Hardcopy p.144)
Position 5999 "systemwide" $130,000 (PDF p.169, Hardcopy p.155)
Position 7599 "systemwide" $43,746 (PDF p.335, Hardcopy p.311)

Subtotal: $505,746 (last year $2 million)

Position 9620 p.144 reimb spfunds $250,000 (PDF p.144, Hardcopy p. 130)

Total $755,746

3 Positions with the same position number 0000 for a total of $ 198,759 (PDF p. 166, Hardcopy p. 152)

Why are interns paid so much? Are they current teachers training to be administrators?
Position 2407 Administrative Intern 77,752?
Position 2202 Administrative Intern 77,002?

Posted by: Two2Three | March 12, 2008 11:21 AM

The city of New Haven, and all other cities in the country, struggle to come up with a few thousand bucks to fund essential services, education, police, fire. Those of us who pay taxes, which means all of us, are rightly angry about significant tax increases that we can ill afford. Yet we have allowed over $220 million dollars to be drained irresponsibly from New Haven alone, over $11 billion from the state of CT. $500 billion nationally; and including future payments for debt interest and veterans benefits conservatively $3 trillion. In New Haven alone, alternative uses of those funds would pay for healthcare for 15,000 people, AND college scholarships for 5,600 students, AND 213 units of affordable housing, AND 6,100 Head Start slots, AND 634 elementary school teachers. And if the current momentum continues those figures of totally wasted taxes will easily be multiplied ten or twenty-fold.

Yes, I'm referring to the costs of the illegal, immoral war on and occupation of Iraq. In addition to those costs we fund a military budget nearing $800 billion that is bloated far beyond protecting us from any conceivable enemies.

While hundreds of billions of dollars are on the table, the real tax thieves have us squabbling over crumbs, actually fractions of crumbs, while they carry huge money bags to the bank.

We have to look beyond the crumbs and glue our focus onto what's truly at stake: the wealth of a nation.

Posted by: Gary Doyens | March 12, 2008 1:27 PM

DeCarlo is correct...this is a depression era budget. I get depressed every time I pick it up and begin to study how our money is being spent across a myriad of impersonal lines of type, and what's not revealed - patronage jobs, double dippers, special assignment teachers and $77,000 interns.

Posted by: FIX THE SCHOOLS | March 12, 2008 4:02 PM

2-2-3,

While the scale of the total national budget vs the local budget is different, that doesn't take local government off the hook. For the average NH taxpayer, it's a close call between what you pay in local property taxes + state income taxes vs. what you pay in federal income tax. And in New Haven, the budget is more than a few thousand dollars....Try half a billion.

The national election this fall will inevitably result in a radical change in policy as it relates to the war and funding for the war. If it does not, then shame on us for electing someone who intends to "stay the course". But at least we have a fair chance.

Our local problem is a bit thornier. Here we have an authoritarian dictator who holds power, who tramples on fair elections, who viciously attacks any opposing voices, who punishes independent elected officials on the Board of aldermen or the local state delegation, who has built his power by doling out jobs and contracts to political supporters and cronies all at the expense of the taxpayers, who is secretive and excessively controlling, who doesn't believe in transparent government, and who has managed to run his city into an economic ditch despite a great economy over the last decade and being home to one of the most powerful economic and global engines in the eastern U.S. (Yale). And unfortunately he has already planted the same seeds of misery for the next generation because more than half of his school students can't read or write.

And yet there really isn't any legitimate political opposition because he has bought it all off, or they don't want to get mowed down by the machine.

Posted by: Teacher | March 12, 2008 6:16 PM

Administrative Interns are teachers interning for administrative positions. They do double duty, both teaching and fulfilling responsibilities of assistant principals. Additionally, they have completed 6-year certificates, so they have had 2 professional degree steps above teachers with only bachelor's degrees.

In response to Fix the Schools: As calculated by the Consumer Price Index, the Jan. 2008 level of inflation in the US was 4.28% I don't know what Connecticut or New Haven's would be compared to that, but generally speaking, the cost of living is greater in Connecticut than the US average.

Posted by: Gary Doyens | March 12, 2008 8:46 PM

Teacher: With regard to Administrative Interns, you're saying there are that many schools without an assistant principal? Also, my information is that many of the special assignment teachers are throwaway postions - they're working lunchrooms and the like but not doing real work teaching kids. Do you have any information or insight into that?

$179M “Bare Bones” Budget Approved

Comments

Sorry, Comments are closed for this entry

Special Sections

Legal Notices

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

Flyerboard

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

NHI Store

News Feed