$47.3M Schools Budget Defies Recession Warning

by Marcia Chambers | February 3, 2009 4:29 PM | | Comments (10)

DSC00567.JPGSuperintendent of Schools Kathleen Halligan has set out to sell a $47.37 million education package to Branford taxpayers, a budget that changes little of the entitlements schools and teachers have come to expect despite the current economic crisis.

In all, the 2009-2010 school budget came in at 3.38 percent higher than last year’s budget even though enrollment is declining. The Board of Education develops an incremental budget each year, using the previous budget as a base. It does not use a zero-based budget system that starts from zero and examines the entire budget, not just the proposed increases.

If adopted by the Board of Finance and the Representative Town Meeting, the school budget will cover roughly half the town’s annual budget, which last year came in at $84.4 million.

An analysis of the budget shows it virtually ignored First Selectman Unk DaRos’s call for all town boards and commissions to examine capital spending before laying off employees. DaRos sent a memo on Jan. 6 to all department heads and commission members urging them “to focus on capital spending” as they go about making cuts. He said budgets throughout the town should reflect “a level of austerity consistent with the economic environment.” Click Here to read it.

But there were no cuts made in the $741,000 allocated for the school system’s capital budget, which includes facilities, infrastructure and technology. Instead, Dr Halligan said that 12.5 positions, those belonging to certified teachers, would be cut, though it also appeared that some of these positions were duplicative or would be eliminated by attrition. A half dozen or so of non-certified teachers were also cut. No information was provided about the possible number of retirements, which could affect layoffs.

Nor were any major programs cut, although a much beloved small strings program could be eliminated because one teacher might lose his job. It could also be restored if enough teachers and violin playing students show up at 7 p.m. for workshops scheduled for Wednesday and Thursday at Walsh Intermediate School.

All-day kindergarten stayed. So did all extracurricular activities. Curriculum and professional development for teachers stayed in. So did an item called “professional development” for teachers (also not explained), that came to $81,029, presumably enough for the strings teacher.

DaRos said the school board’s budget could not rise by more than 3 percent, but even that number seems high. The Board of Education meets to vote on the new budget this Saturday at 9 a.m. at the Branford High School library. The BOE could make cuts before sending the budget to the Board of Finance.

In an hour-long presentation to a standing room only group of 60 at Branford High School last week, Dr. Halligan outlined the budget clearly. But she relied on eduspeak as her preferred language. One aim of the budget, she said, was to foster “continuous growth toward excellence in each student, class and school.” We learned there was also the need to develop “skills for the 21st century.” We even learned that educating the “whole child” — as opposed, say, to half a child — will result in a “well rounded successful member of the community.” These goals, absent any data, were put forth to justify the new school budget.

Laying off certified teachers is an unprecedented step for the school system and administrators know the decision is likely to provoke protest. Parents and students learned at the meeting that they may voice comments at the workshops. They were not allowed to speak after Dr. Halligan’s presentation.

While Dr. Halligan acknowledges the economic difficulties, she also knows she and the Board of Education, along with the RTM, just approved a new $23 million three year teachers’ contract, whose salaries and benefits together make up a whopping 79 percent of the overall school budget. The BOE, the superintendent and the teachers union signed off on the contract in December, when the economy was in full meltdown.

There was no indication at the Halligan presentation that the teachers would voluntarily take any cuts to help one another or the taxpayers though givebacks have become standard in other cities in these lean days.

DaRos has said earlier that he expects the Board of Education “to come in with creative ways to cut. Believe it or not the Board of Education is part of the town of Branford. They should look at the curriculum.”

At a recent Democratic Town Committee meeting DaRos gave a general economic appraisal of the town.

He said he was anticipating serious revenue shortages, the result of foreclosures and job losses which will make tax collection difficult. On the commercial side, he said, “companies are liquidating their new equipment in order to get some cash. So equipment we might have been able to tax is gone.”

As for interest on the town’s investments, he said that in 2007 “our income on investments was $1.7 million. This year it will be 400,000.”

But the most serious issue is that “the growth in the net taxable grand list may be non-existent. We don’t know where that is but I can tell you now that personal property is a disaster. “

The net taxable grand list contains all the property in town that is taxable, excluding those properties that for one reason or another are exempt. No growth in the net taxable grand list means that no new homes are being built. There are several new businesses that are being built or are expanding, DaRos said.

Dr. Halligan and Frank Carrano, the chairman of the Board of Education, acknowledged the difficult, indeed unprecedented, economic crisis that the towns and the state face. Carrano went on to inject a bit of reality, when he said that he recognized that the BOE and the RTM “won’t want to approve any large increases.”

“These are recommendations. We can ignore them or look at some of them. A lot of things can mitigate this budget. We should come to the meetings Wednesday and Thursday and roll up our sleeves.”

##







Share this story

Share |

Comments

Posted by: vinny | February 3, 2009 5:11 PM

DON'T THESE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND, WE ARE IN A DEPRESSION, NOT A RECESSION, I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHO COMES UP WITH THESE OUTLANDISH FIGURES, WE LIVE IN THE TOWN OF BRANFORD, NOT THE CITY OF BRANFORD. ASK JODY FOR HELP AND LEAVE ME ALONE. IIAM OUT OF WORK.! THEY SHOULD FRIST FIND OUT HOW MANY PEOPLE IN TOWN ARE UNEMPLOYED, HOW MANY ARE BANKRUPT, HOW MANY HAVE LOST THEIR HOMES, MEDICAL,ETC. ETC. SOUNDS LIKE A PONZI TO ME.

Posted by: City Hall Watch | February 3, 2009 9:32 PM

It never ceases to amaze me to see the arrogance of so called "public servants" as they dictate what should be spent on education. They talk down to us like we're subjects, and not nearly smart enough to understand what's good for our children. Education is only as good as we can afford to pay for it. Do all the duplicative and wasteful superintendants go to the same super school so you know how to abuse taxpayers?

This increase, with its extraordinarily rich teacher's pack, should be deducted from the budget so that this school budget is at very least flat, if not down by the required 5%. Failure to do so, will lead to deeper cuts in other offices and employees in the rest of the city. What about that does Kathleen Halligan not understand? Perhaps she missed class on the day they discussed that at super-school.

Posted by: Jay | February 4, 2009 9:10 AM

Kathleen Halligan's primary "constituents" are the students. Within that context, I am hopeful that her budget proposal represents a thoughtful and reasonable resource allocation in the best interests of the students. The students are not, although perhaps they should be, particularly interested in "money matters". On the other hand, the Board of Education answers to the students and their parents, who are also typically taxpayers. So, I do believe that the Board of Education is the place where "the buck stops here", quite literally. I will remain optimistic that they will do the right thing and find the critical expenditures in the budget, while holding the overall budget to, at worst, a zero percent increase. By the way, I do have a child in the Branford Public School system.

Posted by: City Hall Watch | February 4, 2009 12:12 PM

Jay:

Sorry - Kathleen Halligan may be in charge of the schools, but her constituents are both the payers and the children. Her budget proposal is irresponsible to say the least. The school board, like so many others, think they are above the rest of the needs of the cities and towns and spend money accordingly. The board and Halligan were given guidelines. If they won't comply, then the budget should be trimmed without their input and they can deal with the aftermath. But at times of rapid escalation in needs in other areas of the city, it is beyond the pale to lay a series of wants, not needs on both taxpayers and town leaders. At some point, you have to reign it in and suck it up like everybody else. She nor the board of ed or more or less important than anybody else. They already chew through the lion's share of the budget.

Posted by: Jay | February 4, 2009 3:32 PM

City Hall Watch:

I certainly do not want to get into an argument or anything, particularly because I suspect you and I are in total agreement: The Board of Education budget that will finally get approved by the RTM must ABSOLUTELY not be any greater than last year's budget, and hopefully, less. All I am suggesting is that it is up to the Board of Education to take the Superintendent's "wish list" into account when crafting a budget to submit to the RTM. This budget must be in line with the needs of the taxpayers. I remain, perhaps unrealistically so, hopeful that the Board of Education will put together and submit a prudent and responsible budget, unlike their recently submitted, and tragically approved, teachers' union contract. On that score, I sincerely do not know whether I was more shocked by the Board of Education's submission of that contract, or by the RTM's approval. I applaud those representatives who stood their ground and voted "no", and I trust they will take the same stance on any increase in the Board of Education budget.

Posted by: scjerry | February 4, 2009 7:01 PM

Let's hope that the town of Branford can reach a compromise on the education budget.

Those of us who are retired, wholeheartedly support education of the children of our younger neighbors, because we all benefit from from an educated society, and we have grandchildren, too.

But measurements of teacher performance have not been particularly effective in changing the quality of education.

Our grandchildren and our children still face the expensive prospect of a full year of extra university/college remedial math and English education beyond four years of secondary education. Not exactly a resounding measure of the success of our educational efficacy.

One of the very important detractors from effective education at primary and secondary levels has been class room discipline.

We hope that pedagogical advances can deal with both teacher and parental approaches to address the fact that many of our children can't get a word in edgewise in a chaotic classroom.

As a fixed-income taxpayer, I'm not a advocate of the latest BOE budget proposals in this very challenging economic environment.

Posted by: Wayne Cooke | February 4, 2009 7:02 PM

Whether it's teachers salaries or a new firehouse, the simple fact is we don't have enough money to do or have everything we want.

While this will--to some extent--always be the case, it is made immeasurably worse by a current administration that has no econominc plan or vision for the future.

As businesses leave and nothing replaces them, taxes increase and services suffer.

A recession/depression makes it difficult enough. It becomes downright impossible when your leaders sit on their hands and do nothing.

Posted by: Bob | February 4, 2009 9:57 PM

As usual, the first thing to go in an educational budget crunch is a music or arts program, despite the fact that there are numerous studies that prove that children who engage in these programs are overall better students in ALL disciplines. Maybe Dr. Halligan ought to do some research herself before she deems what's best for the students. Any research on how "professional development" for the teachers helps the kids?

Posted by: Branford Commenter | February 7, 2009 11:47 PM

Bob:
Few people will dispute the value of art, music, and sports in a well rounded education. While the superintendent surely understands this principle it does seem as if she used an Ouiji Board to make some of her budget cut choices or is she crazy like a fox? What better way to ensure an impassioned response than to suggest to cut a beloved program where the participants, their parents, and John Prins are well equipped to gush their love for and benefits from the program? Understand my irritation is not with the program but about the program being used as bait in the budget process.

You can almost rest assured that the program will be re-instated; that somehow, somewhere, the money will magically appear from mysterious accounts that were found at the last minute with no adverse affect to students or teachers.

Is it any wonder the public mistrusts the Board of Education. Is there ANYONE on that board who will question the status quo? Is there anyone who will question how buying new plow trucks with their attendant maintainance cost will actually save money? Or how bringing snow removal overtime in house is a cost cutter?

Posted by: Jay | February 10, 2009 2:49 PM

Apologies to "City Hall Watch":
I naively, or more truthfully, optimistically, counted on the Board of Education to act appropriately upon the superintendent's budget. Last night, they failed to act in the best interests of their constituents. Cutting 1/2 percent from the superintendent's "wish list" hardly shows resolve, or discipline, or diligence. I do not recall whether or not this budget now goes to the Board of Finance, or whether it goes straight to the RTM. Hopefully, the town gets two more chances to do the right thing. One point of curiosity: If ALL Board of Education employees, not just the central office staff, accept a pay freeze, where would that leave the budget?

Special Sections

Legal Notices

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

Legal Notices

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

NHI Store

Buy New Haven Independent Stuff

News Feed