HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-01-29 School Committee Packet School Committee Meeting
January 29, 2015
Superintendent's Conference
Room
Open Session 7:00 P.M.
1, Town of Reading
Meeting Posting with Agenda
Board - Committee - Commission - Council:
School Committee
Date: 2015-01-29 Time: 7:00 PM
Building: School - Memorial High Location: Superintendent Conference Room
Address: 82 Oakland Road
Purpose: Open Session
Meeting Called By: Linda Engelson on behalf of the Chair
Notices and agendas are to be posted 48 hours in advance of the meetings excluding
Saturdays, Sundays and Legal Holidays. Please keep in mind the Town Clerk's hours of
operation and make necessary arrangements to be sure your posting is made in an
adequate amount of time. A listing of topics that the chair reasonably anticipates will be
discussed at the meeting must be on the agenda.
All Meeting Postings must be submitted in typed format; handwritten notices will not be accepted.
Topics of Discussion:
AGENDA
7:00 p.m.
I Call to Order
II Recommended Procedure
A. Public Input(I)
B. Reports
1. Students
2. Liaison
3. Superintendent
4. Sub-Committee
5. Assistant Superintendents
6. Director of Student Services
C. Continued Business
1. FY16 Budget Continued Discussion &Vote (A)
D. New Business
E. Routine Matters
1. Bills and Payroll (A)
2. Minutes(A)
January 15,2015
January 22, 2015
3. Bids and Donations(A)
Donation to RMHS Girls Basketball
Donation from the Wood End PTO
4. Calendar(I)
F. Information
G. Executive Session
This Agenda has been prepared in advance and represents a listing of topics that the chair reasonably anticipates will be discussed
at the meeting.However the agenda does not necessarily include all matters which may be taken up at this meeting.
Page I 1
L '
YS Town of Reading
1 ., .- '` Meeting Posting with Agenda
z
III Future Business
I Informational A Action Item
All times are approximate and may change.
•
This Agenda has been prepared in advance and represents a listing of topics that the chair reasonably anticipates will be discussed
at the meeting. However the agenda does not necessarily include all matters which may be taken up at this meeting.
Page 12
John F. Doherty,Ed.D. Craig Martin
Superintendent of Schools Assistant Superintendent
for Learning and Teaching
82 Oakland Road
Reading,MA 01867 Martha J.Sybert
Phone:781-944-5800
Fax:781-942-9149y'� Director of Finance&Operations
Reading Public Schools
Instilling a joy of learning and inspiring the innovative leaders of tomorrow
TO: Reading School Committee
FROM: John F. Doherty, Ed.D.
Superintendent of Schools
DATE: January 22, 2015
TOPIC: Continued FY2016 Discussion and Vote
At our meeting on Monday evening, we will continue our discussion of the FY2016 budget prior to
voting the budget as the FY2016 School Committee Approved Budget.
If you have any questions,please contact me.
The Reading Public Schools does not discriminate on the basis of race,color,sex,gender identity,religion,national origin,sexual orientation,age or disability.
Budget Questions FY 16
1. Page 7—I thought the Town Manager had previously included an annual amount in the Capital
Plan for technology replacement. I thought the annual amount was$100,000. Wasn't this
agreed upon a couple of years ago?
In the Capital Plan, there is$75,000 every other year that is allocated to technology
infrastructure, which includes servers, wireless routers, and switches. The funding that we are
proposing is for instructional technology replacement such as computers and SMART Boards.
We are not able to use the capital funds for instructional expenses.
2. Page 7—What is the projected long term savings to add the BCBA(Figure A)?
We currently contract these services out with SEEM at a rate of$100 per hour as needed. We
spend annually about$60,000 for these services. Our thought is that we could bring this
function in-house with no cost impact and have this expertise on staff to help with other
supports. This is a cost neutral restructuring and will not necessarily result in long term savings.
3. Page 8—How much would the rate increase be to maintain the Regular Day Bus Transportation
(Figure B)?
The contract price for the bus for FY16 for the year is$52,200 assuming paid ridership is
consistent with FY15 it would be$435 per student with no cap. We recommend$450 with no
cap to allow for a slight decline in ridership.
SY 12-13 SY 13-14 SY 14-15
Mandated Paid FRL Total Mandated Paid FRL Total Mandated Paid FRL Total
Killam 15 19 7 41 27 33 11 71 29 25 16 70
Coolidge 10 9 19 9 10 - 19 8 14 - 22
Parker - 27 3 30 1 18 2 21 1 18 4 23
RMHS 72 1 73 - 67 10 77 - 63 7 70
Totals 25 127 11 163 37 128 23 188 38 120 27 185
4. Page 8—What are the various schools losing by reducing the Per Pupil Budgets (Figure B)?
don't want this to fall back on parents through additional supply requests.
We currently have about an eighteen month purchasing cycle for our consumables(workbooks)
supplies and materials. In other words, when we release the 30%holdback in April, principals
pre-purchase their materials for the following year. It is our belief that the real impact of this
reduction will not be felt until FY17 which is when we intend to restore funding. This reduction
can only be done for one year and it needs to be restored in FY17.
5. Page 8—Please provide more color on the reduction in substitute teachers (Figure B). Last year
we had lengthy discussions on increasing substitute pay. Could this have been maintained if we
had not increased the pay?
The FY15 budget was developed assuming an increase in our rates paid for long-term and daily
substitutes. We budgeted$469,788 for FY15 assuming the increase to the daily rate(we now
pay daily rates of$75 non-certified,$95 certified, and$125 long-term). As you can see from
Figure 80, our three year average for our daily substitutes(FY12—FY14)was$231,592. This
expense($247,328,$228,262, and$219,186)was for the cost of the Daily Substitutes that
worked due to teachers out for bereavement,family or personal illness, Field Trips,Jury Duty and
Professional Development. Based on annualized YTD data we forecast the cost of Daily
Substitutes will be$270,586 which represents a 23%increase over FY14. This seems reasonable
given the trend in absences year over year and the 26%increase in the daily rate.
The cost associated with Long Term Substitutes is budgeted in Districtwide Reg'l Day budget but
the actual expenditure is captured as part of the Teacher Salary line. The FY15 and FY16 Budget
amounts of$469,788 and$332,702 include both categories of substitutes—short and long term.
The table below breaks out the historical costs for both short and long term substitutes.
FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY15 FY16
ACTUALS ACTUALS ACTUALS Forecast BUDGET BUDGET
DAILY TEACHER SUBS 247,458 228,262 219,121 270,586 324,188 230,342
LONG TERM TEACHER SUBSTITUTE 102,000 84,464 138,800 140,221 145,600 102,360
TOTALS 349,458 312,726 357,921 410,806 469,788 332,702
The total number of daily substitutes needed during the same time period FY14 to FY15 has
remained consistent, (1,794 vs 1,779). Our Unfilled percentage has improved from 9.9%to 7.6%
and our Substitute Not Needed has also increased while our Filled has declined slightly as a result
of these two factors.
We feel the$137,000 savings is achievable as we plan on reducing the amount of daily substitute
coverage needed for professional development with the addition of the two coaching positions.
We will also be using the Mental Health First Aid, Title 1, and School Transformation grant to
fund substitutes for those related activities. We have also had two consecutive years with
multiple staff out due to long term illness. We feel the Long Term Substitute line can be reduced
back to FY13 actual adjusted for the 25%increase.
(Vacancy Family Field Jury Personal Personal Prof. Grand %of
FY15(8/30-12/31) Position) Bereavement Illness Trip Duty Day Illness Development Total Total
FILLED 142 44 169 25 11 165 319 332 1,207 67.3%
Held - - - - - 1 8 3 12 0.7%
Substitute Not Needed - 20 72 5 3 53 134 151 438 24.4%
Unfilled 20 5 21 - - 10 55 26 137 7.6%
Totals 162 69 262 30 14 229 516 512 1,794 100%
(Vacancy Family Field Jury Personal Personal Prof. Grand %of
FY14(8/30-12/31) Position) Bereavement Illness Trip Duty Day Illness Development Total Total
Filled 81 32 214 31 13 141 335 396 1,243 69.9%
Held - - - - - 2 1 - 3 0.2%
Substitute Not Needed - 12 58 2 4 59 124 97 356 20.0%
Unfilled - 1 36 1 1 10 81 47 177 9.9%
Totals 81 45 308 34 18 212 541 540 1,779 100.0%.
6. Page 8—Is there any change in the projected METCO Grant in the Governor's FY 16 Budget?
Yes, we were informed of a$6,492 reduction to our grant in mid-November. This represented a
1.68%change. We feel confident that we have sufficient funds remaining to support this
program.
7. Page 8—With all of the proposed increase in the use of offsets (Figure B)where does this leave
our revolving accounts in terms sustainability going forward?
Each year as part of the budget process we provide an update on all the district revolving funds
balances as of the previous year end(Figure 104)and we forecast a two year roll forward of
ending balances on the funds that we utilize for budget offsets, (Figure 105). The challenge with
this two year roll forward is that the exact amount of revenue, expense and offset is being
estimated for both fiscal 2015 and 2016. If we use the full budgeted offset amounts and revenue
and expenses trend as predicted for FY15 and FY16 then we will reduce the balance in the
revolving accounts as follows:
Athletics, $14,000
Use of School Property$40,000
RISE$103,000
Full Day Kindergarten$170,000
Special Education$344,000
The level of offsets taken to balance the FY16 Budget will not be sustainable over time. The
revolving fund that will be most impacted is our Use of School Property followed by the Full Day
Kindergarten fund.
8. Page 8—What does the reduction in Regular Education Paraeducator and Tutor hours (Figure B)
do with our remediation plans for our recently attained Level 3 status at Joshua Eaton and the
District?
Our proposal reduces regular education paraeducator hours and FTE's, not tutor hours. Regular
education paraeducators do not provide instructional support as part of their job description.
This will not have an impact on instructional support at Joshua Eaton or across the district. In
addition,Joshua Eaton receives Title I tutorial support which is not funded by the operational
budget, but the Title 1 grant.
9. Page 8—Does the proposed reduction in Regular Education Paraeducator and Tutor hours
(Figure B) impact any benefit availability for current Paraeducators?
We are currently working with Principals to determine the reductions. Most likely there will be
reductions in hours and FTE's which may result in paraeducators not receiving benefits.
10. Page 8—Where does the proposed increase in the Athletic and Extracurricular User Fees (Figure
B) compare us to other districts?
We selected 18 communities based on league,proximity and comparable communities used in
the budget book. Eight of these communities(Belmont, Chelmsford, Easton, Milton, Melrose,
North Andover, North Reading, and Winchester)have either tiered pricing or an upcharge for
specific sports.
The fees for Wakefield, Winchester, and Andover are$260,$290, and$350 respectively
conversely the fees for Dedham, Easton, and Mansfield are$125,$150, and$150 respectively.
At$250 we would still be on the low end of our neighboring communities.
11. Page 8—When was the last time we increased our RISE Tuition? Why isn't this being proposed?
We last increased the RISE tuition in 2011. We could look into increasing the RISE Tuition for
next year, however, like full day kindergarten, we have already begun the registration process
for RISE for next year and we have already communicated the tuition cost.
12. Page 8—What are programmatic changes in the METCO and Extended Day programs mentioned
in the narrative?
In the past we used METCO Grant funds for outside tutoring and late buses and other various
opportunities for our METCO students. While we continue to direct funds for late buses we have
found more cost effective tutoring opportunities for our METCO students. The increase in the
offset by$25,000 to$100,000 restores us to the FY13 level. The past few years we have had
funds available at the end of the year.
The Extended Day program has grown considerably under the direction of Sandy Calandrella.
The program is run in our five elementary schools and provides before and after school care.
13. Page 10—At some point during the budget process please provide a line item list of exactly what
the State includes in their Per Pupil Amount. We have this discussion every year and I am never
completely comfortable that we are comparing apples to apples i.e. is bussing included for other
districts? We pat ourselves on the back every year with how well we are doing with little
spending compared to others and I want to be sure that we are really spending less for the
things that really impact learning and teaching. If they are in fact including bussing in this figure
than I want to see where we are if that is taken out. I see our analysis on pages 52-55 but I am
more interested as to whether this tracks with the same categories analyzed by the State.
In the FY16 Budget book Figure 22 charts the In-District Per Pupil Expenditure for FY13. This
chart is for total spending. Using the DESE EDWIN Analytics tool we were able to isolate
transportation expenses and re-calculate per pupil expenditures net of ALL transportation
expenses(Regular and Special Education, Homeless). Below is an updated chart that has both
PPE expenditures. As you can see, Reading ranked 12 out of 12 communities when comparing
total Per Pupil Expenditures and 9 out of 12 when comparing PPE net of ALL transportation
expense.
Per Pupil Expenditure FY13
' E
x$17,500
$15,500
'$13,500 ......... ......_... ._
a
511 500 Wv1 71 ........ __
$9 5. I
" _ ca ' .t 'r.l N. o “ : .� C'. 2 I am t .ti
. 3, '-1: rti o- h 'A D N m .D- 4,y IXi n} m
sa - ct kid v = .fi Si t _ a+ P"' ru ao
rV :: tD kolI .^i d i ri +i,�E N ''t3' 7-11 - N N xi' wi- Z i
R
VY NU!
Ri ' N Y�x N if1.g N {Y v? N N N 14o, .A. N
$7,500 s°
o... .__,». .....,:..
� � 4 ° �� � ° � ��P � � � � �(�
� �.YIP '° .° k� �S � �e �� o P , 31 c
�`� A
PPE w/o Transportation Total PPE
14. Page 11—Please prioritize the Unfunded FY'16 Budget Requests (Figure 3). If we had another
$1,000,000 is this really what we would spend it on before anything else?
Budgetary , es ,s scat tdeodfied Need
2.0 FTE
Parilde more ., s . ..ro'lmsonagtosovedgedatairmis
r• 1 3
aaaaras.1 , $130,000
5.0 FTE
x academic social erm ammo=magmas 2 3
$200,0o0
AddidonMeriecial,,staff toaddrass the groatdesteaddes and
addanistradvedemmidsoateadiete:the inovatadiorigoxitYtitho
oeedswith%Ake awdents Me presenting,dm ry 3.0 FTE
3 1 education
ihniddloot the arc`„ $195,000
as a t $115,000 8 2
MitteMiatiattalS,MI take advantage of pogessionotttwOopnient
�ka° the al 1.0 FIE
„3r.w3 � ., , '•'r.... ,, .. ; $65,000
3 ,�s 'i�� � . r 1.0 FTE
o-lemad l.and 000fIllodalke 5 3
ti $50,000
"•' ^a�. �,�°3a k t s 1.0 FTE
a •�..v" 7 1
ipyema g $•a $95,000
maenad atufganortechn*amaintenanceawreotioshnient $100,000 4 1
aa3.,a a '� � M � �'�• f� 1.0 FTE
$50 000 9 4
''.20% $120,000 10 4
$1,020,000
15. Page 11—How many hours does the$115,000 in additional paraeducator collaboration time
equate to(Figure 3)?
On an annual basis this would equate to approximately 7,420 hours.
16. Page 11—Please be more specific as to the 3 FTE or$195,000 in special education staff(Figure
3). What would these positions be? Where would they be located?
These positions would most likely be learning center positions. Currently, we have some learning
centers and programs with higher than normal caseloads. The 3.0 FTE would be allocated to
schools that have a higher per teacher caseload than other schools.
17. Page 11—Planned Painting Cycle? Has this been cut? If we don't have the$120,000 will
painting not be done?
As you know painting is an operational cost. We do not have a planned painting cycle. If there
are funds available at the end of the fiscal year in our Facilities cost center due to cost savings we
will do some planned summer painting.
18. Page 21—Why are we proposing a 3%salary increase for non-union employees when the
budget is only going up 2.5%? This increase should track with the overall budget increase. I
understand the rationale given in the narrative, but I still feel with should be staying with the
2.5%.
The 3.0%COLA proposed for the non-represented employees who make up approximately 7%of
the entire permanent work force of the school department. Reducing their COLA slightly would
yield a savings to the FY16 budget of approximately$10,000 to$15,000. The 3%COLA
represents what the teachers collective bargaining unit is receiving. Administrators do not have
steps and columns like union employees.
19. Page 22—Please explain the increase of$313,471 In Special Education Tuition&Transportation.
I can't get the numbers in the narrative to add up to the projected increase. The net amounts
for tuition and transportation noted in the narrative don't add up to$313,471.
The FY15 Adopted Budget amount referenced,$3,584,350 is from prior years budget narrative.
The correct amount is$3,724,795 and the difference between the two($4,038,269—$3,724,795)
is the$313,471.
Adopted Requested
Budget Budget
FY2015 FY2016
Pupil Transportation 938,913 983,441
910 Tuition to Other Districts 245,000 147,173
920 Tuition,Out-of-State 49,919 239,744
930 Tuition,In-State 1,857,539 1,919,856
940 Tuition,Collaboratives 633,424 748,055
3,724,795 4,038,269
20. Page 23—A statement is made that we do expect our natural gas costs to increase in the next
contract. What is the basis for this statement? How much?
The district uses Tradition Energy to procure its natural gas contract. We are at the end of a
favorable three year contract and currently pay$7.30 per dekatherm. When the budget was
developed the market pricing was closer to$10 per dekatherm which equates to a 37%increase
in costs.
21. Page 37—(Figure 19). Please explain the 40.8% increase in Debt.
The 40.8%or$1.3M increase in Debt is a result of the Library project.
22. Page 62—(Figure 37). Please update the data to reflect the recent contract. If we are going to
put this data out there it needs to reflect the increases we have given in recent years. If the
state isn't up to date then it is probably not a good idea to show the chart at all. I also noticed
that all of the other charts go through 2013-14 except this one.
The data source for many tables is from the DESE End Of Year Report. These reports are filed
with DESE each year by all school districts. There is a required audit that must be completed and
filed with DESE by March 315t followed by a period for districts to file amendments. Final FY14
data is usually published to the DESE Dart or Edwin by early July.
23. Page 91—(Figure 75). Why are legal services going up 269.6%?
The FY15 budget appears to be underfunded with regard to Legal Services. In FY13 and FY14 the
district legal expenses were$49,477 and$27,025 respectively. The FY16 recommended budget
of$27,720 is in line with current spending trends. The increase is as a result of some lengthy
personnel issues that the administration has been addressing.
24. Page 91—(Figure 75). Explain the increase of 23.2% in Employee Benefits.
The employee benefits included in the administration budget are the district's matching
contribution to tax sheltered annuities for members of the teachers bargaining unit. By contract,
teachers hired after the 1998-1999 school year(these are employees who are not eligible for sick
leave buyback)are eligible for an annual$175 matching contribution to their tax sheltered
annuity.
Regular Day Questions
25. This is the 3`d time a proposal to cut paraeducator hours has been put before the School
Committee. The first time was primarily in the area of Special Education (Colleen Dolan tenure),
and the second time was hours as opposed to FTE's. With the first cut those positions or some
level of them were ultimately restored in subsequent years. The second time the SC ultimately
restored enough hours so as no one lost their health insurance benefits. I bring this up because
it seems like every time we make cuts we go right to para positions or hours. I am opposed to
this as we are robbing Peter to pay Paul and these positions are important to teaching and
learning and have a direct impact on students. Hypothetically I would be more apt to look
toward reducing professional development or cutting back Blue Ribbon expenses.
Our proposal reduces regular education paraeducator hours and FTE's, not tutor hours. This will
not have an impact on instructional support in the classroom. Regular education paraeducators
provide non-instructional support to teachers, clerical, and nursing staff.
The FY16 Budget has been developed to account for continued para support for lunch and recess
coverage at the elementary schools as well as support for kindergarten classrooms at the FY14
levels.
26. Page 96—It is noted that the per pupil cut will be restored in FY'17. I am opposed to anything
that is cut that is not sustainable. I feel this is disingenuous and if we can't live at the level going
forward then don't cut it now. We are trying to get away from 1 year solutions and this
approach flies in the face of this.
27. Please re-explain the need for a 50% increase (Figure 80) in instructional technology. Is this
something that can be done in multiple year steps?
The additional technology replenishment funds brings the district back to pre-FY15 Budget levels
of$100,000 and allows us to continue to strive towards a 5 to 6 year technology replacement
cycle for student and staff computers. It should be noted that we currently have over 70
computers in the district that run on Windows XP and no longer receive any updates or supports
from Microsoft. These computers need to be replaced, which would be one of the first priorities
with this funding.
28. Explain the 12.3% (Figure 80) in guidance.
We restructured at the High School to increase a.4FTE Guidance Counselor to a 1.0FTE or a
.6FTE increase. This was done last year as we continue to increase our social and emotional
supports at the High School.
29. Explain the significant increases in middle school and high school curriculum supplies (Figure
81).
These are funds in the Districtwide Regular Day lines that the Assistant Superintendent of
Learning and Teaching sets aside to purchase things like additional Math or ELA materials for
alignment to the frameworks. We also pay for our Virtual High School and Discovery Learning
Licenses from this line.
30. What is the other expense that went up 1235% (Figure 81)? If something is going to jump by
that amount if should have more color to it as opposed to being buried in "other".
There are a few grouping errors that occurred within the Other Expenses line;specifically the
Other,Software License and Support and Technology categories. The increase in Software
Licensing&Support is our Microsoft 365 renewal which was previously reported as other
expense. The Technology line was also misstated as prior year expenses were grouped with
Other Expenses. The corrected lines are below.
Actual Actual Actual Adopted Requested
Expended Expended Expended Budget Budget PCT
OW Description FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 CHANGE
Other 2,429 4,079 2,169 2,000 2,700 35.0%
Software Licensing&Support 77,093 132,023 93,428 96,905 109,800 13.3%
Technology 88,087 268,724 92,401 50,500 100,000 98.0%
Special Education Questions
31. Explain the 8.8% increase in Other Expenses (Figure 84).
Tuition expense is grouped with Other Expense in the Special Education Budget by Object chart
and is the driver for the overall increase.
32. Explain the District SSP/TSP program director. Is this a position that we didn't previously have?
The narrative mentions that the BCBA will have this as part of the position. In looking at (Figure
85) it appears that we are adding 2 positions at a total cost of$135,000. Did I miss something?
The TSP/SSP program director is an administrative position to oversee the social/emotional
programming from elementary through high school. This position will focus on providing
support and supervision to the staff working in these programs,professional development and
consultation. Additionally this position will provide support to families through assistance with
coordination of care and trainings for parents.
The Board Certified Behavior Analyst(BCBA)will be a position providing district wide
support. This position will be able to provide consultation to teams for students with behavioral
issues whether they are in one of the district's programs or learning center. This position will
also provide us with the ability to have a highly trained person completing functional behavioral
assessments when needed.
33. Why are we reducing District Admin and Support Services by 0.4 FTE(Figure 85)?
In FY16 we budgeted to charge.45 of the District Administrator of Support Services to the School
Climate Transformation grant as she will be acting in the roll as grant administrator.
34. With the recent decrease in fuel costs is it possible to reduce transportation costs? Is a 4.7%
increase realistic? I would think that a decrease or flat is more acceptable. (Figure 86)
We leverage our membership in the SEEM Collaborative to gain efficiencies with regard to
Special Education Transportation for both our in-district and out-of-district students that require
transportation as a condition of their IEP. We developed the FY16 Budget by reviewing the most
current transportation invoices and forecasted for known and anticipated placements. This costs
includes the bus charge and bus monitor charges. SEEM holds the contract and we are a third
party beneficiary of the contract.
Our current contract on the Regular Day transportation expense does not have a fuel escalation
or de-escalation clause. This is something we can explore doing when we bid out the contract in
January 2016.
35. Figure 87—Why is the Team Chair up 87.5%?
$135,000 of this 87.5%or$172,112 increase is for the Board Certified Behavioral Analyst(BCBA)
and the Program Director for the Student Support and Therapeutic Support Programs
districtwide. The balance or$37,112 of this increase is a function of contract and non-contract
increases and a shifting of staff charged to the IDEA grant. It should be noted that we have
restricted the BCBA and Program Director from an existing position and consultation services.
These are not additions to the overall budget.
36. Figure 87—Why are Teacher Salaries up 6.8%?
The FY16 Budget funds all salary and benefit obligations to employees per the collective
bargaining agreement. The increase is a function of step, column and COLA increases.
37. Figure 87—Explain to the extent that we can the collaborative tuition increase of 18.1%and out
of state private residence of 14,558.5%.
The increase is a result of the change in the number of students in those programs combined
with the increase in tuitions. The placements of these students are through the TEAM process.
Districtwide Programs—FY 16 Budget Questions
38. Page 106—Have we seen a difference with the fill rates and quality due the change in the nurse
substitute rate?
The unfilled percentage for FY14 for Nurse Substitutes was 5.7%compared to the FY15(year to
date)percentage of 5.9%through December 31,2014.
39. Figure 91-Why is the Director's salary going up 12.9%?
The increase in compensation was to bring into alignment with the nurses contract.
40. Please explain the competency stipends.
There are seven competency stipends that are outlined in Article XVIII of the collective bargaining
agreement;Dual Licensure,Advance Technology Proficiency, National Institute for School
Leadership(NISL), National Board Certification, English Language Learner, national Certified
School Nurse program and a Behavioral Health competency stipend. Teachers and Nurses must
submit evidence of completion in order to be eligible for the stipend.
41. Page 108—Don't assume the same number of home games for FY'16. Especially football as this
fluctuates from year to year. Please get the accurate amount and budget appropriately.
I will confirm this assumption with the Athletic Director.
42. Page 108—I have already expressed my concern about the increase in athletic fees.
43. Page 108—Why are officials going up 3%? This is not part of collective bargaining.
The Middlesex league and the MIAA determine the costs of the officials. We anticipate an
increase and budgeted a 3%or$1,986 increase in expense.
44. Page 108—Explain 12.1% increase in clerical salary.
The FY16 Budget funds all salary and benefit obligations to employees per the collective
bargaining agreement. The increase is a function of step, COLA increases and an increase in
annual hours as the hours per week was raised from 35 to 37.5 effective July 1,2014.
45. Page 110—I have the same concerns about raising the Extracurricular Activities Fee.
46. Page 110—Is there any other rationale for not raising the band fee other than it is already at
$175. My opinion on this is the same as others, but if we were to raise we need a financial
reason as opposed to it's already at$175.
We can certainly increase the band fee along with the other fees. Our intent was to align the
drama fee closer to the band fee.
47. Page 111—It looks like roughly$50,000 is being added for the additional technician. Is it
realistic to think we can get quality for that salary level?
We do feel this estimated salary will be adequate to fund this restricted position. Our current
technician staff are in the range of$50,000-$54,000.
48. Page 113—Please review the process for bidding the natural gas contract. A 37% projected
increase is alarming.
The district has used Tradition Energy for a number of years. Tradition Energy is one of the
world's largest, independent full-service energy management consultants and works with many
local school and municipalities. We benefit from their experience and knowledge of the
marketplace. The current contract expires June 30,2015 and we anticipate executing a new
contract in the coming weeks. This type of procurement is exempt from MGL Chapter 308. It
should be noted that we have had a lower natural gas cost for the last several years and the
market is beginning to change.
49. Page 115 (Figure 101)-Explain the HVAC increase of 73%. Is this related to the projected
dekatherm increase?
This is not related to the anticipated increase in natural gas pricing. We do not have licensed
HVAC personnel as part of our dedicated maintenance staff. This function is outsourced. We are
in the third year of a three year HVAC contract with Cooling and Heating. YTD we have spent
approximately$28,000 for HVAC contracted services. The combined knowledge that this
contract is expiring and our increase in HVAC calls resulted in our increasing the FY16 Budget to
accommodate an anticipated increase in expense.
50. Page 118. When was the last time the RISE Tuition was increased?
We last increased the RISE tuition in 2011. We could look into increasing the RISE Tuition for
next year, however, like full day kindergarten, we have already begun the registration process
for RISE for next year and we have already communicated the tuition cost.
51. Page 120(Figure 108)-Explain the 43.3% increase for DPW Garage. I couldn't find anything in
the narrative.
The increase in the overall DPW Garage budget is driven largely by the significant spike in
natural gas consumption. We attribute much of the 73.9%increase from FY13 to FY14 to the
severe weather and snow in FY14. Through December the DPW consumption is out pacing the 5
year consumption trend that was used to develop the FY15 budget.
FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13_ FY14
DPW Natural Gas Consumption in Therms 20,787 26,844 17,651 28,833 50,150
General Questions:
52. Can we see the amount we've used from each revolving fund as a budget offset for the past 3
years(with a percentage decrease/increase for each year)?
Balance FY12 FY12 Balance Net FY13 FY13 Balance Net FY14 FY14 Balance Net
30-Jun-11 Revenues Expenditures 30-Jun-12 Gain/(toss) Revenues Expenditures r30-Jun-13 Gain/(Loss) Revenues Expenditures 30-1un-14 Gain/(Loss)
Revolving Fund:
Athletic Activities 190,368 296,054 289,816 196,606 6,238 324,465 330,305 190,767 (5,839) 349,985 364,845 175,907 (14,860)
Drama Activities RMHS 37,575 94,455 105,670 26,360 (11,215) 109,882 88,909 47,334 20,973 117,993 115,800 49,527 2,193
Extended Day Program 230,176 633,992 402,457 461,710 231,534 711,204 630,889 542,025 80,315 883,035 764,430 660,630 118,605
RISE Preschool Program 259,413 173,652 199,727 233,338 (26,075) 250,233 33,899 449,671 216,334 254,310 230,172 473,809 24,138
Use of School Property 136,197 255,511 247,954 143,754 7,557 210,369 192,311 161,812 18,058 200,715 265,825 96,701 (65,110)
Special Education Tuition 411,505 197,130 189,223 419,412 7,907 246,023 - 665,435 246,023 239,098 63,828 840,705 175,270
Full Day Kindergarten Tuition 479,033 636,901 626,759 489,175 10,142 659,922 536,003 613,094 123,919 707,048 665,000 655,141 42,048
TOTALS 1,744,267 2,287,695 2,061,608 1,970,355 226,088 2,512,098 1,812,316 2,670,137 699,782 2,752,184 2,469,900 2,952,421 282,284
53. We're using a large amount in offsets from the Revolving Funds. How much of this is
sustainable, and how much is not? Can you provide numbers to show this?
Figure 105 provides projected ending balances. Please see the response to question 7.
54. I'd like more detail on how a math or literacy coach would work in the district. How is one full
time employee going to meaningful impact teaching and learning across 7 buildings, and more
than 100 teachers?
The coaches will certainly provide some leadership and direction in the middle level grades(for
instance in connection with vertical transition);however, their main focus—especially for the
first couple of years—will be at the elementary level in order to provide a consistent foundation
across the district. Our goal will be to establish a weekly schedule that allows the coaches to be
in the classrooms regularly(and in each building every week). They will also play a key role in
impacting both teacher instruction and student achievement through their regular involvement
with the teacher professional learning communities(PLCs)and by coordinating professional
development during in-service times. The vision also is for our Math, Literacy, and Technology
specialists to work very closely together as well—so that the natural overlap in these areas are
evident and so that there is positive impact across all content areas. Overall, by working
together as coaches—and by collaborating as well with our curriculum teacher leaders, these
positions will allow us to incorporate a more on-the-job, embedded approach to continuous
professional development that will not only enhance all other professional development teachers
receive but also provide a more effective way of applying that learning in the actual classrooms
with students—and consistently across all classrooms and grade levels.
55. How/when will families be notified of changes to bussing should this budget pass? What
options will they be given? What will the new fee be?What is the timeframe for them to make
decisions and/or alternate transportation arrangements?
We will begin communicating with families after the FY16 Budget is approved(May timeframe).
If we have enough interest and deposits to support the second bus we will continue to provide
non-mandated transportation. Please see question 3 for further information.
56. What percentage of overall sub payroll does the$137K cut represent? Do you anticipate this will
only impact teachers out of the classroom for Professional Development,or will the impact be
greater?
Please see the response to question 5.
Specific Questions
57. Page 11–Please prioritize these unfunded needs and show how they are connected to the
District Improvement Plan.
Please see the response to question 14.
58. Page 15- Please explain the timeline for when we'll know the amount of our federal Title 1 and
IDEA grants and if/how this information might change our budgeting outlook.
We will not know our FY16 award amounts until August 2015 which is too late to change the
budget outlook.
59. Page 31-Of the cut to 7.4 FTE regular education paraeducators, please break out the
percentage that represent the Joshua Eaton paras currently covering the oversized K class;the
percentage that do administrative/paperwork that is not student-facing;and the percentage
that work day to day with students directly.
Our proposal reduces regular education paraeducator hours and FTE's, not tutor hours. This will
not have an impact on instructional support at Joshua Eaton or across the district. In addition,
Joshua Eaton receives Title 1 tutorial support which is not funded by the operational budget, but
the Title 1 grant. The funding for the three,fifteen hour kindergarten paraeducators for the
larger class sizes in the Eaton Kindergarten will be restructured to fund the Grade 1 teacher for
next year.
The reductions that we are proposing for the regular education paraeducators is for areas that
are less involved with working with students. There will be reductions in teacher, clerical, and
nurse support such as secretarial help, copying, bulletin board and material preparation, and
other areas. We are maintaining lunch and recess coverage, as well as, kindergarten support
similar to FY14 levels.
60. Page—35—Why are we assuming no increase in Ch. 70 funding?
We learned in December that Reading's equalize property values and per capita income grew at
a faster pace than the state average and that the District was now considered over funded in
terms of Chapter 70. We will most likely receive the hold harmless$25 per student increase but
this will not result in a change to our FY16 Budget of$41,350,043. As discussed at the Financial
Forum, any additional Chapter 70 funding increase beyond the 2.5%will go back to the general
fund to offset the amount of reserves that will be used in the FY16 budget.
61. Page 37—The decrease to materials and supplies is huge. It's$36,000 more than the$76K for
principal per pupil budgets and the reallocation for technology replenishment. What will be cut
to make up the extra$36,000?
While Figure 19 does indicate a$112,353 reduction in Materials,Supplies and Equipment this is
across all cost centers and not just Regular Day. The impact of the combined restructuring of
$76K of per pupil funds can be seen in better detail in Figure 80 on page 97. When developing
the FY16 Budget we reviewed three year trend data and FY15 Budget data to make budget
corrections where appropriate. As a result of this review we reduced approximately$18,000 in
the Special Education Cost Center to have the FY16 Budget be in line with actual spending and
future needs.
62. Page 53—Is the 71/29% health insurance split consistent on both Town and School side?
Health Insurance is negotiated by the Town Manager with a representation of all of the
collective bargaining units for both Town and Schools. All costs associated with this benefit are
funded through the Town budget. The percentage split is consistent with all collective
bargaining units on both the Town and School side, including retirees.
63. Page 55—Please add FY12 numbers to Figure 28 and add a percentage change note to each
town. I'd like to see how the PPE are growing over time and how our growth is or isn't keeping
pace.
1- -
$17,000
`r
$15,000 -
(--- v
$13,000 i4.N v}
ev
$11,000 W N u°°i _,w ,o o' '.c o" m cr rn m m N -i N `o,??, f4
$9,000 `r4 � ''-i 41/ .-,..-4�.__...1 —O 7 0''i -f F-
re in, v► VW). of tin+n ', ,in .
$7,000 , .F._ _ -----r ° .._._ E '.,. ;_. ; E '• `
E
0
SL 4\ \-\ 4\ o J,
oo <(' .0 -4 . � 0
`<<�
� y `o `P `�� � a ,� SS
� �P ,.1\- ° �h
'_FY12 FY13
64. Page 55-Have we given any thought to removing Dedham from our peer group of
communities? Their Per Pupil Expenditure is more than $3000 more than their nearest peer.
The other 12 communities are all within$1700 of each other. It would seem that Dedham might
distort averages.
We can always update our peer communities. It might be helpful to identify our peer group in
September. This would allow for adequate time to collect historical and current data for the
various charts in the budget book.
65. Page 60—We budgeted 566.2 FTEs for FY15, but ended up with 570.8 FTEs. The list indicates
several positions that were added, especially 4.6 more paraprofessionals than originally
budgeted for, 1 elementary teacher more than budgeted for, .6 of a guidance counselor
position, and .4 more in secretarial positions that budgeted for. Why did we add those
positions? Similarly, it appears we cut several positions from the FY15 budget including 1
middle school teacher and 1.2 high school teachers. What positions were cut and why?
The Staffing tables(in their current format) were first included in the FY14 Budget book. This file
is manually updated and as such may contain human error. It is also important to note that the
'Actual'is at a point in time as we have turnover throughout the year. The.4 secretarial position
was approved by the School Committee earlier this year to hire a dedicated resource to oversee
our Facility Rental activities. As you may recall, there was a gap between the requested FY15
Budget and the approved FY15 Budget that required the School Committee to reduce the budget
by$285K. This reduction impacted FTE's and the FY15 staffing tables were not updated to
reflect the changes.
The 4.6 paraeducators are special education paraeducators that are driven by student's
Individualized Education Plans. The additional elementary teacher was to address a class size
issue at Killam last year. The middle school teacher that was cut was the middle school health
teacher. The high school reduction was a physical education teacher.
66. Page 60—it appears we are cut 1.2 FTE high school teaching positions in FY15 and are restoring
them in FY16. What positions?
There are a few staff at the High School that are currently on leave. The coverage FTE was
omitted from the FY15 Actual columns. They are included in the FY16 Budget at their correct
levels.
67. Page 61-Where will the $47K/2.9 FTE cut to tutors be felt?
The Staffing tables(in their current format)were first included in the FY14 Budget book. This file
is manually updated and as such is prone to human error. This is part of the paraeducator
reduction but was inadvertently included on a Tutor line in the staffing pivot data. There are no
tutors being reduced in this budget.
68. Page 63—Given the relative youth of our staff and the recent contract changes,are we sure that
this chart is helpful?
We do have a high percentage of staff that are receiving step and COLA increases. It might be
more informative to conduct compensation survey or analysis where we compare our steps and
lanes to other districts. Here is a quick comparison of Reading and Milton for a few lanes and
columns. As you can see the dollar and percentage variance grows the higher the step.
Milton Reading $Variance %Variance'
B-4 52,938 51,224 (1,714) -3.2%
M-4 54,476 52,198 (2,278) -4.2%
M-8 68,064 60,521 (7,543) -11.1%
69. Page 84—Why did we increase clerical hours from 35 to 37.5 hours per week? What is budget
impact of this increase?
This was part of the collective bargaining negotiation for the most recent contract effective July
1,2014. The increase at the elementary and support secretarial(athletics,facilities and food
services)were to bring them in line with the middle and high school levels. This increase was
also offset by a reduction in hours for two positions located at the high school. The net impact of
this change was$
70. Page 85—Please explain the large cuts in athletic&extracurricular salaries and the large
increase in facilities clerical salaries.
The contracted coaching and advisor stipend expense along with the budgeted offsets are
reported in the other salary line for both the Athletic and Extracurricular. The significant
decrease is the net of the contracted increase and the increase in the budgeted offsets from our
Revolving Accounts. The large increase in facilities clerical salaries is due to the.6 facility rental
coordinator position that was approved by the School Committee in August. This position was
restructured from existing funds from Extended Day and a decrease in salary from the Custodian
Supervisor position.
71. Page 87—Why are we projecting such a large decrease in SPED spending at Joshua Eaton?
This location receives revenue support from a special education student from another district
that is paying tuition to our district. We have increased our use of offsets from our Special
Education Revolving funds to mitigate the reduction in our Circuit Breaker award.
72. Page 98—Please explain the "other" line under"other expenses." What is covered there,and
why is there so much volatility in that number?
There are a few grouping errors that occurred within the Other Expenses line;specifically the
Other,Software License and Support and Technology categories. The increase in Software
Licensing&Support is our Microsoft 365 renewal which was previously reported as other
expense. The Technology line was also misstated as prior year expenses were grouped with
Other Expenses. The corrected lines are below.
Actual Actual Actual Adopted Requested
Expended Expended Expended Budget Budget PCT
OBJ Description FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 CHANGE
Other 2,429 4,079 2,169 2,000 2,700 35.0%
Software Licensing&Support 77,093 132,023 93,428 96,905 109,800 13.3%
Technology 88,087 268,724 92,401 50,500 100,000 9&0%
73. Page 108—Why is the secretarial salary line increasing by 12%?
The FY16 Budget funds all salary and benefit obligations to employees per the collective
bargaining agreement. The increase is a function of step, COLA increases and an increase in
annual hours as the hours per week was raised from 35 to 37.5 effective July 1, 2014.
74. Page 108—How much of athletics revenue fund support is due to proposed increases in fees
(therefore,sustainable)versus just using more of the revolving fund (perhaps unsustainable)?
We estimate the increased fee should generate a net of approximately$50,000 as we are also
adjusting the individual and family cap. This assumes similar participation levels.
75. Page 110- How much of extracurricular revenue fund support is due to proposed increases in
fees (therefore, sustainable)versus just using more of the revolving fund (perhaps
unsustainable)?
We estimate the increased fee should generate a net of approximately$10,000 as we are also
adjusting the individual and family cap. This assumes similar participation levels.
76. With respect to the$849,620 budget reductions: How much of that amount derived from
budget offsets? How much is derived from actual cuts?
Figure B details the increased use of offsets to balance the budget. The total increase to offsets
is$412,215 with the remaining$437,405 coming from the area's listed in Figure B.
77. What are the current responsibilities of the Middle/HS Transition Psychologist position (6-12
District Psychologist)? Who will provide those services next year?
The focus of the current position is psychological evaluations for students with social/emotional
needs, supporting students who are transitioning in and out of hospitalizations at the Middle
School and High School Levels and providing supervision for some of our behavioral health
interns. The TSP/SSP Program Director will be able to support the transition for hospitalization
for the students in those programs district wide and provide supervision for our interns. For
general education high school students who are hospitalized we have a general education social
worker who can coordinate this care. At the middle school level for students not in SSP we will
need to rely on our counseling staff.
78. Why do we need the proposed administrative position of Program Director for Student Support
Program and Therapeutic Support Program?
The Student Support Program (SSP)and Therapeutic Support Program(TSP)are programs
designed to service students with social, emotional and behavioral needs. These students
require consistent programming as they move from elementary to middle and on to high school.
Additionally, the staff working in these programs need to have regular meetings to discuss
student needs, adjust behavior plans and remain connected with families and outside providers.
The Director of these programs will coordinate weekly building based meetings with program
staff along with monthly vertical meetings. The Director will also assist in the development of
parent outreach and support programming, along with coordinating with outside providers to
support wrap around services. This position will ensure that consistent social and behavioral
supports are in place for one of our most fragile populations.
79. How will those services currently provided by EMARC for our 18-22 year old SPED students be
continued next year?
We are looking to increase our own internship and job coaching opportunities with the staff we
have. We are looking to decrease any duplication of supports that are being provided by our
own staff and EMARC.
80. Will the proposed para-educator cuts place an additional work load on teachers or remaining
para educators?
Anytime a reduction is made to support staff who provide teacher and clerical support, there will
be an impact on other staff. This reduction will affect copying, office coverage, classroom
coverage and small group supervision. It will also affect the ability for us to use paraeducators
to cover for teachers on a short term basis while a teacher is at a meeting. There will be a
reduction of kindergarten para support back to the FY14 levels. The FY16 Budget has been
developed to account for continued para support for lunch and recess coverage at the
elementary schools as well as support per kindergarten classroom.
81. Please provide the budget allocation for substitute teachers for FY 2015 and amount expended
to date.
Please see the response to question 5.
82. Please provide the budget allocation for substitute teachers for FY 2014 and total amount
expended.
Please see the response to question 5.
83. Please provide the budget allocation for professional development for FY 2015 and amount
expended to date.
There are a number of accounts that are combined to arrive at the total regular day professional
development. Below is the detail support for the amounts in Figure 81.
FY15 FY15
Professional Development BUDGET YTD ACTUAL
CONFERENCE/WORKSHOP 4,680 2,523
PD EXPENSES DISTRICTWIDE 21,930 43,924
PD EXPENSES ELEMENTARY 67,600 7,938
PD EXPENSES GENERAL ED 7,800 -
PD EXPENSES HIGH SCHOOL 45,420 20,581
PD EXPENSES MIDDLE SCHOOL 42,800 6,825
PROF DEV/TRAINING TRAVEL 300 -
PROFESSIONAL DEV/TRAINING 100 -
TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 98,000 61,980
Grand Total 288,630 143,771
84. Please provide the budget allocation for substitute teachers for FY 2014 and total amount
expended.
There are a number of accounts that are combined to arrive at the total regular day substitute
amount. Below is the detail by school for the amounts in Figure 81.
FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY15 FY16
ACTUALS ACTUALS ACTUALS Forecast BUDGET BUDGET
DISTRICT WIDE DAILY TEACHER SUBSTITUTES 17,500
BARROWS DAILY TEACHER SUBSTITUTES 15,975 20,677 17,012 20,494 28,000 17,880
BIRCH MEADOW DAILY TEACHER SUBSTITUTES 26,240 19,841 13,885 25,948 26,688 19,999
EATON DAILY TEACHER SUBSTITUTES 20,405 23,444 23,706 25,180 31,500 22,510
KILLAM DAILY TEACHER SUBSTITUTES 21,767 16,515 19,588 19,192 23,188 19,290
WOOD END DAILY TEACHER SUBSTITUTES 22,918 17,255 14,526 21,662 23,188 18,230
COOLIDGE DAILY TEACHER SUBSTITUTES 31,244 36,687 30,155 41,767 49,438 32,695
PARKER DAILY TEACHER SUBSTITUTES 28,324 30,192 33,183 28,888 40,688 30,566
RMHS DAILY TEACHER SUBSTITUTES 78,602 62,160 66,753 87,456 84,000 69,172
TOTAL SHORT TERM DAILY SUBS 247,458 228,262 219,121 270,586 324,188 230,342
LONG TERM TEACHER SUBSTITUTE 102,000 84,464 138,800 140,221 145,6(X) 102,360
TOTAL REGULAR DAY SUBSTITUTE BUDGET 349,458 312,726 357,921 410,806 469,788 332,702
85. Please provide the specific categories from the FY 2015 professional development line item and
their allocations.
Please see the response to questions 83.
86. Please provide the salary offsets that are a result of the grant funding for Sara Burd and Sara
Lennon
The FY16 Budget includes an offset to the School Climate Grant of approximately$60,000 for
.45FTE of Ms. Burd, Grant Coordinator and.25 FTE of Mr.Strutt, Data Analyst.
87. One thing I was wondering was: I thought the goal was to prepare 2 budgets—one that met the
2.5%which cut$849.620 and the other which would level fund the budget. I have seen the
former,which items would be added in order to make the level funded budget?
Figure B details the list of items that would be added back to achieve a level funded budget.
88. Are exit interviews a regular part of staff departure? Is salary size a prevalent reason for leaving
or is it other factors? How does per pupil spending impact the longevity of staff in direct and
indirect ways? How is the staff culture impacting the expense necessary to recruit and keep
new staff?
We do conduct exit interviews for staff that choose to participate. Salary is one of the major
reasons that teachers, administrators, and other staff leave our district. That reason has
increased over the last few years. Other reasons include proximity to home, benefits, relocation
to another state, and looking for new job opportunities that are not available here.
What we cannot provide in salary, we try to provide with building our culture through
professional development opportunities like the Blue Ribbon Conference, a strong induction
program for first year teachers, support to take risks and new challenges, updated curriculum
materials and technology, and clean and pleasant working environments.
In the TELL Mass survey that was completed last year, well over 90%of our teachers stated that
their school was a great place to work and learn.
89. (p.7/101) I appreciate the restructuring of our staff to include the benefit of a K-12 Student
Support Program director and the Board Certified Behavior Analyst. Who will this director work
with—teachers?Administration? Students? All three?
Please see the response to question 78.
90. Will we be losing staff who have connected with students in the process of bringing on board
these new positions?What roles do those staff play now and will they leave holes that will be
detrimental to the students/schools?
The only restructured position that works directly with students in that capacity is the middle
school/high school transition psychologist for students who have been hospitalized. Question 77
explains how those services will be re-assigned.
91. Are there ways we can utilize the grants received by RCASA and the RPS,which enable us to
meet student needs in new and creative ways,which free up staff and support time for
behavioral health in each school? For instance,the School Transformation Grant might help
teachers get up to speed on Baseline Edge and enable the monitoring of statistics that catch
students who are consistently tardy/absent before the detriment to their classwork. This
question relates to the budget but also to the follow up after the difficult decisions are made.
Unfortunately, we cannot utilize the RCASA and RPS grants to offset out FY16 Budget. The
RCASA grant funds the salaries and programs to run RCASA, which comes out of the Town
budget. We do utilize the RCASA services significantly in providing support and education for all
of our students, especially in our high school health classes and with students who have violated
the chemical health policy.
92. If we need to increase the fees for athletics/drama/band—is it possible to ease this burden by
lowering or eliminating the cost of entry fees? This will help folks maintain their donations for
raffles, purchase of food at events, and their and other family members' presence at their
children's competitions/performances. This would be especially helpful at the more expensive
venues such as the Reggie Lewis Center...
Unfortunately, we cannot control the cost of entry at other venues. Without extensive analysis
of our gate receipts it would be difficult to quantify the impact of reducing or eliminating
admission fees for spectators.
93. Could there be two tiered charging at events—cost for local participant families being different
from those who come from other towns? I am not sure this is a good idea given it might start a
chain reaction with other towns, but am wondering if Tom Zaya can look into this...
Without extensive analysis of our gate receipts it would be difficult to quantify the impact of
reducing or eliminating admission fees for spectators.
94. How much is the gym open and accessible to students above and beyond athletic teams? Is this
impacted by the current budget?
The fitness center is available four days a week and there is no impact to the staffing of the
fitness center in this budget. The gym is available to students in between seasons, but it not
available when sports are in season.
95. Football/Hockey Helmets—do we have the most protective kind? If not,we should try for
maximum protection of our students' brains—is this an expense on the horizon and will it be
paid by the school or boosters?
Our equipment is in line with safety regulations for football. There are some student athletes in
football who have chosen to purchase helmets that are more geared for students who have had
concussions. We also have those helmets available for those students who have suffered head
injuries. Hockey players purchase their own helmets.
96. If Para-Educators are cut,who is going to do the smaller reading groups? The interim
assessments of student progress?
The reductions in paraeducators does not affect instructional support. Tutors, reading
specialists, and special education staff provide small group instructional support for students.
Teachers and tutors provide the assessments of student progress.
97. Who is going to enable the second tier of MTSS to happen smoothly and in the classroom? I
think these cuts will especially work in opposition to District Improvement Goals 1 and 3 (p.42
&44/45).
The reductions in paraeducators does not affect instructional support or Tier 2 services. Tutors,
reading specialists, and special education staff provide small group instructional support for
students. Teachers provide the assessments of student progress.
98. If this cut is implemented how do the schools think they can compensate?
See question 97.
99. Are there ways that we can cut time and spending on standardized tests and re-focus on
meaningful education,and convey to colleges and further education why and what changes are
being implemented and their benefits? If not now,when? If the Race to the Top funds prevent
this,then when are we released from this obligation and how do we work towards not
becoming obligated again?
We currently do not spend any funds on standardized tests. The only standardized tests that we
administer is the PARCC and the amount of testing time for PARCC is less than the MCAS. State
testing is required by law and was first enacted with the Educational Reform Act of 1993.
100. At what point should/can our district take a stand on limiting the cost and amount of
time spent on standardized testing? This relates to budget in terms of amount of preparation and
support as well as for costs for standardized tests.
Please see the answer to number 99.
101. On page 11,the budget document talks about wanting a Data or Information
Management Specialist but not funding this request. I thought this was a part-time position that
would fall within the Transformation Grant? Was I wrong?
The School Transformation Grant is funding a.25 FTE Data Analyst position, which will only
satisfy what we need for the grant. There are several other school districts who have hired data
analysts over the last few years and it has significantly improved how a school district is able to
use data to improve student learning.
102. How are we going to deal with the shortage of subs combined with the cutting back of
para-educators along with an increase in professional development and assessment?
Please see the response to question 5.
103. This SPED budget does not account for any unanticipated placements, para-educators
or special ed teachers—how is this going to be impacted by the decrease in regular education
para-educators and substitute teachers? Are para-educators going to be filling in for teachers,
leaving classes short on support staff and both regular and SPED students treading water when
they should be swimming?
Regular Education and Special Education are two distinct and different cost centers. There is no
budgeted increase in special education paraeducators. We are in the process of requesting
quotes to engage a consultant to conduct a Special Education program review to help us
determine appropriate staffing levels and re-allocation of resources. From time to time a
paraeducator will cover a class so that a teacher can attend an IEP meeting. We expect this will
continue.
104. Offsets from SPED and RISE Tuitions are going to be used to "accommodate the
decrease in the circuit breaker and the reduction in regular ed para-educator hours." Does this
mean tuition will be used to lessen the decrease in reg ed para-educators? (minutes 1/8 p.4)
The increase in offset from the Special Education and RISE Revolving funds are to mitigate the
impact of the circuit breaker loss. There is no increase in this offset to mitigate the reduction to
Regular Education Paraeducators. We could not legally use a Special Education Reveling fund to
support our Regular Education operating expenses.
105. What is the cost of running the summer Geometry class for high school students?
$5,000, which is the cost for the planning and teaching hours for the teacher. Last year, over 20
students participated in the summer geometry class.
John F.Doherty,Ed. D. Craig Martin
Superintendent of Schools Assistant Superintendent
for Learning and Teaching
82 Oakland Road
Reading,MA 01867
Phone:781-944-5800 Martha J Sybert
Fax:781-942-9149 s i Director of Finance&Operations
Reading Public Schools
Instilling a joy of learning and inspiring the innovative leaders of tomorrow
TO: Reading School Committee
FROM: John F. Doherty, Ed.D.
Superintendent of Schools
DATE: January 29,2015
TOPIC: Donation to the Wood End Library
At our meeting, I am asking the School Committee to accept a donation,in the amount of$315.19 from
the Wood End PTO to be used to purchase library books for the Wood End Library.
If you have any questions,please contact me.
The Reading Public Schools does not discriminate on the basis of race,color,sex,gender identity,religion,national origin,sexual orientation,age or disability.
eir--,
John F.Doherty,Ed.D WOOD END ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Joanne E.King,M.Ed.
Superintendent 85 Sunset Rock Lane,Reading, MA 01867 Principal
Tel: 781-942-5420 Fax: 781-942-5428
MEMO •
To: Martha Sybert,Director of Finance and Operations
From: Joanne King,Principal`
Date: January 23,2015 �"'"_
RE: Donation to Purchase Library Books
Wood End School received a check from the Wood End PTO to purchase library Books.
We ask that the School Committee accept this donation in the amount of$315.19. Please
see the attached copy of the books to be ordered.
. Thank you.
Instilling a joy of learning and inspiring the innovative leaders of tomorrow.
Wood End Elementary Parent Teacher Organization, Inc
January 20, 2015
To:Joanne King
From: Wood End PTO
Joanne,
Enclosed please find a check from the Wood End PTO in the amount of$315.19 to purchase library
books.
Sincerely,
n,lQAA/�
Kelly Mahoney
PTO Treasure
•
John F. Doherty,Ed.D. Craig Martin
Superintendent of Schools a-•:r»;y,: Assistant Superintendent
for Learning and Teaching
82 Oakland Road
Reading,MA 01867 <' Martha J.Sybert
Phone:781-944-5800 �r ° Director of Finance as Operations
Fax:781-942-9149 '�. '•_`'
TY:
Reading Public Schools
Instilling a joy of learning and inspiring the innovative leaders of tomorrow
TO: Reading School Committee
FROM: John F. Doherty,Ed.D.
Superintendent of Schools
DA'l'E: January 29, 2015
TOPIC: Donation to RMHS Girls Basketball
At our meeting,I am asking the School Committee to accept a donation, in the amount of$1,500 from
the RMHS Basketball Support Team to be used to support the coaching assistant for the girls varsity
team.
If you have any questions,please contact me.
The Reading Public Schools does not discriminate on the basis of race,color,sex,gender identity,religion,national origin,sexual orientation,age or disability.
RMHS Basketball Support Team
c/o Christine Downey
89 Avalon Road
Reading,MA 01867
January 20,2015
Martha Sybert
Director of Finance and Operations
Reading Public Schools
82 Oakland Road
Reading,MA 01867
RE: Donation to fund Girls Varsity Basketball Coaching Assistant
Dear Ms. Sybert: 1
The RMHS Basketball Support Team would like to make a$1,500 donation to the Reading
Public Schools to fund the coaching assistant position for Girls Varsity Basketball(held by
Megan Clark). Enclosed is the check made out to the Town of Reading. If you have any
questions,please contact me or Head Coach James DeBenedictis. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Christine Downey
Treasurer of RMHS Basketball Support Team
Cell: 781-820-3472
'''',.s...,
Town of Reading
i . � `'.
Meeting Minutes
N.,,fr_. - DRAFT
„..
■
Board - Committee - Commission - Council:
School Committee
Date: 2015-01-15 Time: 7:00 PM
Building: School - Memorial High Location: Superintendent Conference Room
Address: 82 Oakland Road
Purpose: Open Session Session: General Session
Attendees: Members - Present:
Linda Snow Dockser John Doherty, Superintendent
Jeanne Borawski Martha Sybert, Director of Finance
Chuck Robinson Carolyn Wilson, Director of Student Services
Gary Nihan Craig Martin, Assistant Superintendent
Chris Caruso
Elaine Webb
Members - Not Present:
Andrea Nastri & Carl Gillies, Student Representatives
Others Present:
Chris Copeland, RTA President
Tom Zaya, RMHS Assistant Principal for Athletics & Extra-Curricular
Lou Caputo, Network Administrator
Kelly Colon, Director of Facilities
Lynn Dunn, Director of Nursing
Kristin Killian, RMHS Fine Arts Department Head
Adam Bakr, RMHS Principal
Paula Perry, Fincom
Reading Public Schools Budget Parents
Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: John F. Doherty, Ed.D. Superintendent
Topics of Discussion:
I. Call to Order
Chair Caruso called the School Committee to order at 7:05 p.m.
Chair Caruso welcomed guests and reviewed the agenda.
II. Recommended Procedure
A. Public Input(I)
Chair Caruso called for public input.
B. Reports
Page I 1
Sub-Committee
Dr. Snow Dockser reminded the communit 'of the Martin Luther King
celebration that will be held on January 19t . The event begins at 9:30 a.m. with a
light breakfast and the program begins at 10:00 a.m.
C. Continued Business
D. New Business
FY16 Budget Presentation
District-Wide Programs
Dr. Doherty reviewed the Health Services, Athletics, Extracurricular and District
Technology cost centers. He pointed out that this cost center does not include
instructional technology which is in the Regular Day cost center. The
Superintendent reviewed the connection with the district goals and initiatives.
This cost center plays a critical role in the behavioral health of our students.
He reviewed the drivers to this cost center. As with all cost centers, contractual
collective bargaining salary increases make up a major portion of the budget.
There will also be increases in Extra-Curricular and Athletics due to offsets from
the proposed increase in user fees.
Ms. Sybert began the review of the individual cost centers.
The Health Services cost center will see increases in the salary line as a result of
collective bargaining agreements. This cost center is level funded for all other
categories.
Mr. Robinson asked what constituted the 9% increase in the salary line. Dr.
Doherty indicated that we have one nurse that has a Master's degree.
Athletics budget drivers include increases in coach's salaries, and the cost of
game staff personnel. A decrease in transportation costs was made based on the
past use. It was felt that the proposed cost should be sufficient. There will be an
increase in the offset from the Athletics revolving account as well.
This budget is proposing an increase in user fees. Ms. Sybert reviewed
comparisons to other surrounding and comparable communities. User fees have
not been increased since 2012. Dr. Doherty added that the revenue from the user
fees is used to cover 92%of the coach's salaries. Ms. Sybert shared athletic
participation numbers which have stayed steady over the past few years, including
the year the user fee was increased.
Discussion continued regarding the possible impact of increased user fees. The
members were concerned that participation levels may suffer. A question was
asked regarding ticket costs for home events. Mr. Zaya said the Middlesex
League AD's set the ticket cost for league events. Revenue generated by ticket
sales for home games goes to our budget. Mr. Robinson suggested that students
not be charged to attend home events and asked if it was possible to determine the
Page 12
revenue from student ticket sales. Ms. Sybert said she would look into gathering
that data.
Mr. Caruso asked what the impact would be if the individual fees were increased
and there was no increase in the caps.
Mrs. Perry suggested it may be time to look at a tiered fee structure for some
sports.
Discussion continued and the members asked questions regarding the need to rent
facilities for track, gymnastics, swimming and hockey. Mr. Zaya pointed out the
facilities used for track meets can be pricey but as renters of the facility, the
league controls the concession and gate receipts.
Mrs. Webb cautioned that before tiered fees are considered more data needs to be
available. Mr. Nihan does not want to discourage participation.
Ms. Sybert reiterated that the user fees are used for coach's salaries and not
supplies. Mr. Robinson said the Booster organizations supplement the coaches'
salaries.
Dr. Doherty said the Boosters provide funding for additional coaches. These are
positions that the head coach or Boosters would like to have but are not
necessarily needed.
Dr. Snow Dockser asked it financial assistance was available to families. Ms.
Sybert said we use the free and reduced lunch process.
She went on to review the Extracurricular Programs. She reviewed the proposed
budget. Most of the offset used in this cost center comes from Drama and Band
user fees. As with Athletics, this budget is proposing an increase in Drama user
fees.
Mr. Caruso asked what the participation rate was for drama. Ms. Killian said that
the participation rate remains level. Mr. Caruso then asked how many shows are
there in the year. Ms. Killian said there is one show per season with 2 in the
winter.
Mrs. Borawski asked for clarification regarding the professional development line
in the Athletic and Health Services budgets. Mr. Zaya shared that the
professional development funds are used for mandatory coach training and other
optional programs offered by the MIAA. The coach's education programs began
last year. Dr. Doherty shared that all coaches will need to be CPR certified
starting next year. Dr. Doherty also said that Athletic and Health Services
professional development had previously had come out of the Regular day budget,
it now appears as part of the Athletic and Health Service cost center.
Dr. Snow Dockser fears that increased user fees will decrease the donations
received from Booster groups. Ms. Killian said as a Director running an extra-
curricular program she looks long and hard at what the needs vs. the wants are
and works with her Booster/Parent groups and is sensitive to the impact increased
fees will have.
Page I3
Mr. Robinson asked how much we pay to the MIAA. Ms. Sybert will get the
information.
Mrs. Webb followed up on what Ms. Killian shared regarding wants vs. needs and
there needs to be balance when working with parent's groups and the Boosters.
Network and Technology Maintenance drivers include increases in salaries.
There will also be the addition of a Technician. The funding for this position will
be from savings in the School Transformation grant. The addition of this position
will allow for the Elementary Technology Integration Specialist to focus on
supporting the teachers and working with the proposed K-8 curriculum coaches.
Dr. Snow Dockser asked about the wants vs. needs of the district devices. Dr.
Doherty said we are not replacing them on the rate we should be and reminded the
Committee that the technology replacement line was reduced by $50,000 this
year. We have added 200 devices in the past year most of them donated by PTO
and we are increasing the bandwidth for across the district in preparation for
PARRC testing. This budget will add $20,000 to allow for these improvements
and updates.
Discussion continued on different funding options, the connectivity issues
experienced in the buildings and how many devices and how much money the
PTO groups and REF provide to the district.
Mr. Robinson asked if all classrooms have Smartboards. Dr. Doherty said all
elementary and high school classes do. The district is currently looking at other
technology that is less expensive to replace the Smartboards that no longer work.
School Building Maintenance
Ms. Sybert reviewed the makeup and functions of this cost center. She reviewed
the drivers to this cost center. As with all cost centers, contractual collective
bargaining salary increases make up a major portion of the budget. Other drivers
include increases in HVAC services and the projected increase in natural gas
costs. Ms. Sybert shared that she learned today that gas prices are going down
and it is the hope that we lock into a new contract at a lower rate than is budgeted.
Our current contract for natural gas expires in June. We are also continuing to see
reductions in electricity consumption. There will also be a $50,000 offset from
the Extended Day Revolving Account. Dr. Doherty reminded the Committee that
utility costs for the modular classrooms is not included in this budget.
Mr.Nihan asked if the Extended Day produced enough revenue to support the
$50,000 offset. Ms. Sybert said the offset is based on the net building use hours
and nonprofit rental rates and since the program's inception it has grown a great
deal. Mrs. Perry followed up asking if this was a sustainable offset. Ms. Sybert
feels it is. Dr. Snow Dockser asked if there would be a deficit if full day
kindergarten space issues were not resolved because many of those kids attend the
Extended Day programs.
She then reviewed the staffing budget by object and square foot maintenance
expense by building.
Page I 4
Town Building Maintenance Cost Center
Ms. Sybert continued reviewing the Town Building Maintenance budget. As with
all cost centers, contractual collective bargaining salary increases make up a
major portion of the budget.
Mr. Robinson asked what was included in the Extraordinary Maintenance line.
Mrs. Colon said that line is needed for unplanned repairs that are beyond
preventative maintenance but do not fall into Capital expenses. She referenced
the repair to a lift in the DPW garage.
The Committee asked for clarification in the spending of this line and why there
was a large increase between 2014 to this budget.
III. Routine Matters
a. Bills and Payroll (A)
The following warrants were circulated and signed.
Warrant P1515 1.11.15 $1,388,284.22
Warrant S1530 1.15.15 $319,926.46
b. Minutes (A)
Mr. Robinson moved,seconded by Mr. Nihan,to approve the revised open
session minutes dated January 8,2015. The motion carried 6-0.
c. Bids and Donations (A)
d. Calendar
Dr. Doherty reminded the Committee of the next meeting on January 22nd. It will
be the Public Hearing on the FY 16 budget and review of the questions submitted.
The School Committee will vote on this budget on January 26th which will allow
time to make whatever revisions needed before submitting to the Town manager
by February 1St
Mr. Caruso reminded the group of the Financial Forum on January 21St
IV.Information
V. Future Business
VI.Adjournment
Mr. Robinson moved, seconded by Mrs. Webb, to adjourn. The motion
carried 6-0.
The meeting adjourned at 8:33 p.m.
Page 15
NOTE: The minutes reflect the order as stated in the posted meeting agenda not
the order they occurred during the meeting.
Page 16
Ses *:: Town of Reading
m ) Meeting Minutes r
,,,,,,,041.:/
DRAFT
�.,
Board - Committee - Commission - Council:
School Committee
Date: 2015-01-22 Time: 7:00 PM
Building: School - Memorial High Location: Superintendent Conference Room
Address: 82 Oakland Road
Purpose: Open Session Session: General Session
Attendees: Members - Present:
Linda Snow Dockser Craig Martin, Assistant Superintendent
Jeanne Borawski Martha Sybert, Director of Finance
Chuck Robinson
Gary Nihan
Chris Caruso
Members - Not Present:
John Doherty, Superintendent
Carolyn Wilson, Director of Student Services
Elaine Webb
Andrea Nastri & Carl Gillies, Student Representatives
Others Present:
Chris Copeland, RTA President
Mike Scarpitto, RMHS Assistant Principal
Sarah Marchant, Coolidge Principal
Doug Lyons, Parker Principal
Karen Feeney, Joshua Eaton Principal
Paula Perry, Fincom
Reading Public Schools Budget Parents
Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: John F. Doherty, Ed.D. Superintendent
Topics of Discussion:
I. Call to Order
Chair Caruso called the School Committee to order at 7:04 p.m.
Chair Caruso welcomed guests and reviewed the agenda.
Public Hearing on the FY2016 Budget
Mr. Caruso called the public hearing on the FY2016 budget to order and asked if
there was any public comment.
Rebecca Liberman feels the major initiatives in the budget do not address the failing
achievement levels and the Level 3 status at Joshua Eaton. She also felt that there is
Page I 1
the lack of a pathway to advanced math classes and less money should be spent on the
PARCC implementation and more on teachers. There also should be a focus on the
high needs sub-groups.
RTA President Chris Copeland read a statement on behalf of the RTA Executive
Board. The Board does not support the proposed cuts in regular education
paraeducator hours and substitute teachers. She asked the School Committee to seek
other revenue sources which may have to include an increase in the per pupil. Both
of these proposed cuts will impact teaching and learning.
Chair Caruso closed the public hearing at 7:11 p.m.
II. Recommended Procedure
A. Public Input(I)
Chair Caruso called for public input. There was none.
B. Reports
Sub-Committee
Dr. Snow Dockser thanked all that helped to make the Martin Luther King
celebration a tremendous success. She also reported on the Enough Abuse
Campaign workshop she attended at the Police Station. Mr.Nihan also attended
and said there would be another session in Burlington later this month.
Director of Finance & Operations
Ms. Sybert reported on the outcome of the recent Financial Forum where the
Finance Committee voted to move the modular classroom request forward and the
Board of Selectmen also voted to hold a Special Town Meeting on February 23`d
She also shared that as part of the high school midterm exam week,the juniors
participated in the Real World Problem Solving activity.
C. Continued Business
D. New Business
III. Routine Matters
a. Bills and Payroll(A)
There were none.
b. Minutes (A)
Mr. Robinson moved, seconded by Mrs. Borawski,to approve the revised
open session minutes dated December 22,2014. The motion carried 5-0.
Page 12
Mr. Robinson moved, seconded by Mrs. Borawski,to approve the open
session minutes dated January 12,2015. The motion carried 5-0.
c. Bids and Donations (A )
CMS PTO
Mr. Robinson moved, seconded by Mrs. Borawski,to accept the donation in
the amount of$1,000 from the Coolidge PTO to be used to support the travel
and lodging expenses for the Challenge Day leaders. The motion carried 5-0.
RMHS Volleyball
Mr. Robinson moved,seconded by Mr. Nihan, to accept the donation in the
amount of$850 from the RMHS Volleyball Parents Organization to be used
to purchase volleyballs and a cart for the volleyball team. The motion
carried 5-0.
d. Calendar
IV.Information
V. Future Business
VI.Adjournment
Mr. Robinson moved, seconded by Mrs. Borawski, to adjourn. The motion
carried 5-0.
The meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m.
NOTE: The minutes reflect the order as stated in the posted meeting agenda not
the order they occurred during the meeting.
Page 13
2014-2015 School Committee Meeting Date
School Presenting @ mtg.
Jan. 29th School Committee I I FY2016 Budget-Vote
Feb. 2nd School Committee
Feb.9th School Committee Office Hours Caruso&Robinson
Feb.23rd Special Town Meeting
TBD School Committee RMHS
March 9th School Committee Parker Office Hours
March 18th FY16 Budget Presentation Finance Committee
March 23rd School Committee Birch Meadow
April 6th School Committee Office Hours Webb&Snow Dockser
April 7th Local Election
April 27th Town Meeting
April 28th School Committee Killam
April 30th Town Meeting
May 4th Town Meeting
May 7th Town Meeting
May 11th School Committee RISE Office Hours School Choice/Borawski&Nihan
May 18th School Committee
June 1st School Committee Office Hours
June 15th School Committee
1.22.15
All meetings are in the Superintendent's Conference Room at 7:00 p.m. unless otherwise noted.
Dates and locations subject to change. (Bold indicates new or changed date or location.