Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-03-11 School Committee Minutes - Finance CommitteeREADING SCHOOL COMMITTEE Reading, Massachusetts Joint Meeting with Finance Committee March 11, 1999 CALL TO ORDER At 7:37 p.m. Chair D'Antona called the School Committee to order. Present were School Committee members Cavicchi, Dahl, D'Antona, Stohlman, Twomey and Williams. Also present were Superintendent Harutunian, Associate Superintendent Richards and Town Accountant Richard Foley. At 7:37 p.m. Chair Keigley called the Finance Committee to order. Chair Keigley informed the Finance Committee that Superintendent Harutunian would be making a presentation to the Committee regarding the FY00 School Committee's Recommended Budget. FY00 BUDGET Dr. Harutunian thanked the Committee and distributed a copy of the list of questions submitted to him by members of the Finance Committee. Dr. Harutunian addressed each of the questions. 1. How are actual FY99 expenses comparing to Budget? How much will the School Department need in additional funds at the Spring Town Meeting to finish out FY99? Dr. Harutunian advised the Committee that the School Department was behind approximately $180,0004200,000. Dr. Harutunian discussed the accounts that are over budget and distributed information showing why the accounts are over budget. Special Education - 4 additional unanticipated students Administration - over in the advertising, medical expense and maintenance of equipment accounts Regular day — over in transportation account 2. What was implemented in FY99 from last year's priority list Dr. Harutunian distributed information showing what was implemented from the FY99 priority list. Please complete a Budget Break down for the proposed FY00 School Department Budget. Joint Meeting with Finance Committee -2- March 11, 1999 Dr. Harutunian distributed information regarding the Town Manager's budget and the Superintendent's recommended reductions. 4. In the Budget Highlights outlined on page 4 through 6 (blue pages of the budget) what portion represents mandated spending? Dr. Harutunian distributed information regarding FY00 staffing requests. 5. Relative to the $811.5M increase in personnel expense, how much is mandated? Dr. Harutunian advised that the Special Education positions were mandated. 6. How many more years will the School Department have to pay Early Retirement Assessment? Dr. Harutunian advised that this is the last year. 7. Was the Technology position moved from Administration to Regular Day and a 13.5% increase assumed? Dr. Harutunian advised that the position was moved and that there was a $4,000 funding error. What has been year to date spending on labor counsel? Which contracts are up in FY00 resulting in labor counsel expense being maintained at $40,000? Dr. Harutunian advised that he expects a $5,000 shortfall in the account. He also informed the Committee that the School Committee does not use labor counsel to negotiate just to advise. 9. What is the Regular Day Per Pupil assumption used in this budget? How much of an increase is it over last year? Dr. Harutunian distributed information regarding the per pupil at the elementary, middle and high schools. 10. Why are Collaborative expenses in Regular Day? Does the School Department still belong to two Collaboratives? Why are there small amounts of SPED expenses in Regular Day under Instructional Supplies - Textbook Replacement, Media/Educational Software and Instructional Equipment? Joint Meeting with Finance Committee -3- March 11, 1999 Dr. Harutunian advised that Northshore Consortium services some regular day students. He advised that Reading still belongs to two collaboratives. He also advised the Committee that the small amounts of SPED expenses in regular day cover supplies for .1 and .2 special education students. At the principals request this money is left in regular day so that the expenses can be tracked. 11. Curriculum Initiatives total $250,000, is this a $100,000 increase over last year? What portion of this total is dependent on funding new positions? What portion is mandated? Dr. Harutunian advised that there is a $100,000 increase over last year. He stated that none of this is mandated but that if curriculum is not implemented to meet the frameworks then Reading will eventually fall behind. 12. What has been the YTD expenditure on student transportation services? Is the $44,000 increase in FY00 more reflective of actual expenditures or does it mean more students will be bussed in FY00. Dr. Harutunian distributed information regarding the mandated bussing costs and the reasons for the increases. 13. Please update us on the status of the Metco program, how many students, where are they in the system? What is the School Department policy regarding Metco given the current enrollment issues? Does Reading have to accept Metco students that are Special Needs students? How much is the Town reimbursed by the state for Metco? Dr. Harutunian distributed information on how many Metco students attend Reading Public Schools and the grade and location for each student. 14. Does the proposed $693,822 increase take into consideration the 9 or 10 unexpected Special Education students from this current fiscal year? How much is allocated to unidentified students in FY00? Dr. Harutunian advised that the increase does take into account the unexpected Special Education students from this fiscal year. 15. What are Itinerant Services and why is speech therapy declining from $11,500 to $3,000. Dr. Harutunian advised that the decrease is a direct correlation to the Individual Education Plans of students. Joint Meeting with Finance Committee -4- March 11, 1999 16. Our legislators mentioned some proposals for changes in Special Education law or funding, is there any chance legislation could impact the FY01 budget? Dr. Harutunian advised that he had spoken to Special Education Attorney Rick Sullivan and at this time he didn't see any changes in the near future. 17. Last year the budget called for the hiring of an additional nurse. Was this person hired and how was their time allocated? Dr. Harutunian advised that the nurse was hired and distributed information regarding the nurses' schedule. 18. When is the nurses' contract up for renegotiation? Dr. Harutunian advised that the contract was up June 30, 1998. 19. Under Athletic Services there is $4,000 for Maintenance of Fields, isn't the Town maintaining the fields? Dr. Harutunian advised that this is for painting the lines on the fields which the town does not do. 20. How much would it cost to follow through on the changes we recommended last fall but delay further implementation of the Peat Marwick study? Dr. Harutunian distributed the three and one half -year financial summary sheet for the Peat Marwick study. 21. The way the budget has been proposed by the Town Manager, Building Maintenance for Town and Schools falls under the Town's total budget. Is the School Committee prepared to go forward on that basis or does the budget presentation need to be changed before Town Meeting? Mr. Stohlman stated that he wants accuracy and the budget should show maintenance under the schools budget. Mr. Keigley asked how the School Committee felt about the town/school maintenance merger. Mr. Twomey stated that the agreement can work but the process must be clarified. Maintenance can not be held sacred when reductions are being made elsewhere. Ms. Williams stated that she felt when reductions are being made all items must be put on the table, maintenance should not be held separate. Joint Meeting with Finance Committee -5- March 11, 1999 22. Has the School Committee reviewed the Town Manager's proposed capital budget? Are the totals for the school building projects reasonable and timely Dr. Harutunian advised that the School Department had just received the capital plan and will be reviewing it. 23. How likely is the acquisition of the property adjacent to Parker? Dr. Harutunian advised that the Town Manager received an appraisal on the property today and it is to early to tell. 24. The wide area network expenditures are now spread out from FY05 to FY08, how does this fit into the School Department's technology plans? Dr. Harutunian advised wide area networks are at all schools except Barrows. 25. What is the minimum increase the School Budget can sustain and provide the same service as this current year? (assuming no layoffs of current staff) Dr. Harutunian distributed a budget analysis to answer questions 25 and 26 showing the total amount needed for salary increases and special education costs (mandated costs). 26. What are the mandated increases in this year's budget (i.e. SPED, Reform Act, salaries, etc)? 27. What are ramifications of Peter's proposed $967M cut to your proposed Budget? Dr. Harutunian referred back to his recommendation regarding budget reductions. 28. Who determines eligibility for SPED? Is it by an individual, committee or other? Dr. Harutunian distributed information from the Department of Education regarding determining eligibility for special education. 29. Is SPED reimbursable at all? Any aid available? Dr. Harutunian distributed information on the school special revenue funds including federal grants for special education. Joint Meeting with Finance Committee -6- March 11, 1999 30. How can the state mandate programs and cut increases in aid simultaneously? Dr. Harutunian advised that he had no answer but he urged people to contact their local representatives. 31. Have enrollment projections changed at all? Dr. Harutunian distributed information showing the enrollment projections done in 1992, 1997 and 1999. 32. What does STEP schedule look like (teachers and administrators)? Dr. Harutunian advised that the contract was negotiated to increase from 7 steps to 13 steps. 33. Are class sizes part of negotiations with teachers? Dr. Harutunian advised that class sizes are not part of the negotiations. 34. Can we get a copy of the teachers' contract? Dr. Harutunian advised that when the contract is printed copies will be available. 35. Do the schools have a grant coordinator who seeks out federal and state grants? Dr. Harutunian advised that there is no grant coordinator. Chair Keigley opened the meeting up to questions from the Finance Committee and members of the audience. Committee Member Grimm asked how the $100,000 for technology would be spent. Dr. Harutunian advised that it would be used for upgrades, virus protection, etc. Carol Grimm stated that George Hines wants to know if professional development and tuition reimbursement could be cut and if athletic fees could be added. Dr. Harutunian advised professional development and tuition reimbursement were contract issues. He stated that athletic fees were a possibility but that the last over ride in Reading passed with the understanding that no fees would be added. Mr. Stohlman stated that not adding fees was not a legal binding but morally binding issue. Joint Meeting with Finance Committee -7- March 11, 1999 Ms. Cavicchi stated her concern that adding an athletic fee may exclude some students from participating in extracurricula activities. Nat White stated that Reading is not a wealthy town and the inflation index is only 21/2%. Ellen Commito asked if the 99 new pupils referred to in the budget analysis would bring down the regular day per pupil. Dr. Harutunian advised that the per pupil for regular day would go down because you were adding 99 more pupils to basically the same budget number. Jean Durant asked Dr. Harutunian to describe what the impact of not hiring the requested staff for the high school would be. Dr. Harutunian advised that not hiring the staff would increase class size, prevent students from being able to schedule classes that they had requested or a combination of both. A member of the audience stated that the school department was trying to fit the budget into the Town Manager's proposed budget and she stated concern that regular day would go down. Dr. Harutunian advised that regular day is the only account not frozen and that he also has concerns about regular day going down. Mr. Dahl stated that the state foundation formula will be reviewed next year and Reading's representatives will have input into the formula and state aid could go back up. Ms. Cavicchi stated that the league of women voters found the foundation formula was not equitable and was geared more towards larger cities. ADJOURN At 10.20 p.m Ms. Cavicchi made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Twomey seconded the motion The vote was 6 -0 Ms. Cavicchi Mr. Dahl, Ms. D'Antona, Mr. Stohlman, Mr. Twomey and Ms. Williams. espectfully sqbnitted, arry . Harutunian, Ph.D. Superintendent of Schools