This article addresses some of the common misconceptions that circulate within the community regarding the schools and the school budget.

---

The town budgets have funded enough to maintain existing services in the schools; existing services won't be cut if the school override fails.

Just as the town needs the municipal override to pass in order to provide the same services next year that the town provided this year, GDRSD [0] will need the school override to pass in order to provide the same services next year that our public schools provided this year.

Contractual and other non-discretionary increases for FY08 account for $1.84 million of the $2.26 million total increase in assessments to the towns. The additional increase in assessments allows for some new spending that the district has proposed in order to address some of the more critical areas of concern in the schools.

The municipal budgets of the two towns have funding allocated for just over $1 million of the amount the schools need to adequately fund the FY08 school budget. The district recognizes the tight financial situation that both towns are in and has expressed appreciation for the support town officials have given the schools.

GDRSD is requesting taxpayers in both towns to approve an override to fund the remaining amount of revenue they need from the towns. The override gives taxpayers the opportunity to decide whether they are willing to accept a tax increase in order to preserve the $1.2 million in new and existing services [1] that will have to be cut if the override fails in both towns. Most of those cuts will impact existing staff and programs. The Administration is concerned about how the loss of those services will impact the quality of education across the district.

The schools haven't ever really had to cut anything

Since the state started pulling back on funding schools in FY02, GDRSD has had to make a number of cuts to existing services. Some of those cuts were primarily driven by a need to reduce the amount of an override request or avoid an override, not because the school Administration and School Committee did not feel the spending was needed. In some cases (this year being no exception), a decision to not add personnel is like a cut, because the workload requires the additional staff. Whenever cuts must be made, the district focuses on cutting new positions first, because cutting existing personnel and hours affects affects the lives of people we know, and it doesn't result in unemployment expenses.

Some of the cuts made in recent years include:

• Reduction in the number of classroom aides
• Reduction in central office and administration personnel
• Cut backs on professional development, and shifting as much training on site as possible to avoid travel
• Putting maintenance and building improvements on hold. After a couple years of having all maintenance on hold, GDRSC [1] and town officials grew concerned about the wisdom of continuing that practice. The district now maintains 5-year plans for building maintenance and capital improvements, which are funded at minimum levels.
• Deferred spending on technology and technology support staff
• Reduced spending on textbooks and classroom supplies,
• Deferred hiring for departments, like guidance and custodial services, which are now understaffed for their present workload
• Cutting elementary art, music, and PE back to one day/week. (Some of these programs were later restored, but the kids in those grades during those years had an extra "reading" period during the day.)
• Deferring full implementation of K-12 foreign language program (which is now subject to cuts.)
• Increasing user fees to the point where many parents are paying as much as $1000/year to have kids in sports or music, or send kids on field trips, and supplementing classroom supplies.

They can always "find the money" if an override doesn't pass.

There have been a two occasions in recent years when a school override failed in Dunstable, and yes, in both cases, money was "found" (not by the school) after the override failed, which kept those override failures from having a serious impact on the schools. Had that money been available to the school district prior to the election, they might have avoided an override request.

• In 2003, there was a "two-tier" override question on the ballot. The smaller override (Option B) passed in Groton but did not pass in Dunstable. (The failure of Option A in both towns kept previous cuts from being restored and required an additional 17% cut in classroom supplies.) Since failure of the override in Dunstable meant the school funding was not guaranteed, the law required that notice of a pending layoff be given to approximately 43 staff members.
  
  Earlier that year, it had been pointed out that Dunstable was consistently under estimating local receipts (from excise taxes, etc.) by as much as 200%, which was Dunstable's traditional practice for generating a comfortable amount of "free cash" (roughly $200,000) each year. The "free cash" was used to cover expected overruns in snow removal and to fund one-time purchases that were approved at town meetings. (For example, in January that year, the town voted to buy the $490,000 highway garage with funds from free cash and stabilization, and still had $93,000 to fund excess snow removal.) Out of concern for the impact that cutting well over $1 million from the school budget would have had on the schools, Dunstable officials chose to use enough free cash to almost match (proportionally) the amount of the Option B override that passed in Groton.
  
  The practice of using free cash to fund operating budget expenses is generally not recommended, but it allowed the school to recall many of the layoff notices that year. Unfortunately, by the time that happened, several of the staff members who had been given notice had already found other jobs. The school lost some valued employees that year. Since then, the town has made an effort to more accurately project the revenue expected from local receipts, but that has resulted in lower balances in free cash.
• In 2004, the district was once again in a position of having to ask for a $93,000 override. Because of the proportional relationship in funding between the two towns, the School Committee was looking at what was roughly a $400,000 cut to the school budget. Fortunately, in July, after the override had failed, the House Ways & Means Committee (the final word on the state budget) chose allocate a much larger amount of funding to Groton Dunstable than had been allocated . The district had no way of knowing that funding would be allocated before it put the override on the ballot for the town election.

This unpredictability in state funding levels is an issue that our district (among others) has actively addressed at the state level. Apparently they were heard, because this year, the State made a significant change in the timing of its budget cycle such that the House Ways & Means Chapter 70 funding decisions were finalized before our town elections this year. This is the first year the district has known exactly how much Chapter 70 funding they will get from the state before asking for an override.

Given the changes in town budgeting practices and budgeting practices at the state level, the likelihood of money being "found" this year to save the schools if the overrides fail in both towns is next to zero. This year, if the override fails in both towns, we can expect the proposed cuts to be made, with the accompanying impact on the schools.

The school never gives money back

They give money back when they have money they can afford to give back without short-changing education. They just rarely have money to spare.

For example, in 2001, the district realized some savings by refinancing some of its debt. That money went back to the towns. The 2001 Town Report shows that Dunstable got $137,000 from GDRSD, which was put in the Stabilization account that year.

Our current Superintendent has frequently expressed his awareness of the financial situation that the towns and their taxpayers are in. He has stated publicly that, if the district gets any more funding beyond the $1.2 million they need to balance the budget for FY08, he will recommend that the School Committee vote to give that money back to the towns.

What we give them is never enough. If you give them more money, they'll just find a way to spend it.

Ever since the school chose to open the school budget detail up to the towns through the Joint Budget Planning meetings that are now being held several times each year, the school budget has to hold up to some very close scrutiny from the two towns and the public. This keeps the district from spending money on anything that is not well-justified.

A few years ago, the district received a post-election windfall of almost $900,000 in additional funding from the state. They had already made some very difficult decisions to cut the budget back by close to $400,000 that year. They could have easily used the windfall to restore all of those cuts. Instead, in anticipation of future revenue shortfalls, they used only 10% of the money to restore approximately $100,000 in services, and put the rest of it in savings (the E&D account), which at that time, had a balance well below the state recommended level, which would have had the district at a disadvantage for getting good bond ratings. That account has since been whittled down by subsequent budget squeezes - spending it on things such as building repairs, and last year, in support of the town's interest in avoiding an override, approximately $500,000 of E&D funds was used to balance the budget and allow the district could get by another year without an override. Had they not saved that "windfall" for a rainy day, they would have been making deeper cuts and asking for an override much sooner than now. The E&D balance is currently around $650,000, which is again, below state recommended levels.

Look at all the partially full buses! Can't they save money by getting rid of some of those buses.

First of all, the state requires regional districts to provide transportation for all students, regardless of whether the students use the bus or not. When the state issued this mandate, it made a commitment to fully fund transportation costs. It has not met that commitment for several years now, typically funding only 80% of the transportation costs. The district has been addressing this problem at the state level. Either the state should release the mandate, thereby allowing the district to locally manage transportation costs, or it should fully fund transportation.

Second, in the event of an emergency, the district must have the ability to quicky evacuate students in the schools.

The school administration does its best to manage bus routes to minimize the number of buses used, but they must be able to provide a seat for every child at the elementary, middle school, and high school levels.

Why should teachers get raises when we (private sector employees) don't?

Teachers are getting raises this year, in accordance with their contract. Salary increases are approximately 3% this year, similar to what the town provides, but there are other types of increases based on experience and stipends that add up to a larger overall increase, in some cases, as much as 7%. However, unlike some private sector jobs, teachers work in a competitive job market. Good teachers have a choice of schools to work in. We want to keep our good teachers.

The question for any employer (private or public) should be whether an employee is being paid at a fair and competitive rate for the job they do. Raises are primarily a mechanism for adjusting salary levels to remain competitive and not lose valued employees because they can get a more competitive salary somewhere else.

Since our schools are only as good as our teachers, it is in our best interests to hire and retain good teachers. To do this, the district needs to offer competitive salaries to its employees. GDRSD salary levels are right in the middle of average salaries for school systems in this area, with the average salary being roughly $52,000 in a range of $34,000 for a starting salary and a top ranked teacher paid at $70,000.

Teacher salaries and pay increases are determined by a contract with the teachers union, which is negotiated every three years. When the last contract was negotiated, the teachers union approved changes to health insurance benefits that saved the district $500,000. For the most commonly selected health plan, teachers pay 21% of the cost. Others pay 35% of the cost. They also got less than 3% increases in the first two years of the contract.

The district will engage the teachers union in negotiations this year for a new contract that would begin in FY09.

They're cutting academics and other athletics programs just to bring football in.

That statement is not true. No programs will be cut to make room for football. Existing athletic programs will only be cut, along with any plans for any new programs, if the override fails.

The $26,500 budgeted for the introduction of JV football and indoor track programs next year has been one of the most hotly debated topic throughout the budget cycle. Many are against introducing these new programs in a year when we are being asked to pass an override. Other are saying we shouldn't fail the whole override and force $1.2 million in cuts to other services because of this one line item.

Several of the questions related to the introduction of the football program are answered in Questions 23-27 in the Frequently Asked Questions [2] document.