MINUTES
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING
BOARD OF FINANCE AND THE
BOARD OF EDUCATION
MAY 9, 2006
A SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE BOARD OF FINANCE AND THE BOARD OF EDUCATION, to discuss the school budget, was held on Tuesday, May 9, 2006 in the Council Chambers.
Those in attendance included Mayor Ryan J. Bingham, members of the Board of Finance Daniel Farley, Bruce Cornish, Mark Bushka, Joseph Nader, and James Zeller, members of the Board of Education Paul Cavegnaro, Chairman, A. Bates Lyons, Douglas O’Connell, Elinor Carbone, Robert Lutka, Wendy Traub, Heidi Laus, and Michael Broverman, Superintendent of Schools Dr. Susan O’Brien, Director of Business Services Nancy Haynes, Director of Human Services Gary Lambour, Director of Pupil Services Judith Babcock and City Comptroller Alice Proulx. Board of Finance member James Nichol, and Board of Education members David Oliver and Valerie Royals were absent.
Mayor Bingham called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
On a motion by Mr. Cornish, seconded by Mr. Farley, the Board of Education was allowed to present their budget to the Board of Finance.
Chairman Paul Cavegnaro stated that this budget is a well studied and well considered document. It represents a snapshot of where the community of Torrington is today relative to its educational needs. It represents the two areas in the school district that the board sees as being most in need of help and correction. These needs are at the point of entry into the school system at the earlier grade levels and at the end of the system at the Torrington High School. The reasons largely have to do with two factors affecting our community and will continue to do so for years to come. They are 1) a continuing change and increase in a new demographic element coming to Torrington of which a significant portion is of low income families or individuals with children, and 2) the High School is in need of
significant changes. The current schedule at the high school was never able to materialize efficiently or to address the needs of the majority of the students in the district. A drop out rate of nearly 20% is expected. Their budget document was constructed to meet the following goals:
1) Continuously improve student performance
2) Attract, develop, and retain the best and brightest individuals
3) Insure safe, stimulating, and welcoming school environments
4) Enhance and expand community connections
5) Utilize all resources effectively and efficiently
Mr. Cavegnaro indicated that the proposed budget totaled $56,529,282.00, an increase of $3,934,524.00 or 7.48%. He acknowledged that it was a significant amount of money. He noted that last year they talked about a maintenance budget. They talked about holding things as status quo. This year, the Board of Education has decided after long and thoughtful consideration, that they would act decisively and swiftly to implement changes they believe are absolutely critical if the educational system is to move forward to the point where it can become attractive to all kinds of people who wish to move to Torrington.
Mr. Cavegnaro noted that mandatory obligations totaled $2,132,152.00 or 4.05%, and that Math and Sciences were areas of great concern at the elementary level. New textbooks are being purchased to coordinate with the new Math curriculum approved last year. Math will be aligned throughout the system from elementary all the way up to the high school.
Mr. Cavegnaro indicated that the Middle School sports program will be restored. The accreditation at the high school needs to be addressed. Ten new teachers will be necessary to implement the new schedule at the high school.
Mr. Cavegnaro turned the meeting over to Dr. O’Brien, Superintendent of Schools.
Dr. O’Brien reiterated the facts that there are serious curriculum concerns in all five elementary schools, in that the curriculum in each of the schools is not identical to one another. There are at least three different programs at different grade levels from different publishers. Teachers teaching at the same grade level in different schools are using different materials and sets of objectives. Our elementary program cannot be a strong, consistent and coordinated program if we have Heinz 57 going on among the five buildings. That’s what’s happening in our Math Program.
The Board of Education strongly believes that it needs to take this first step to unify the curriculum across all grade levels in all elementary schools. Our teachers have already gone trough extensive professional development in how to use the new textbooks proposed in this budget.
Next year, Dr. O’Brien will ask the Board of Finance to approve reading and language arts material because they are in the same situation.
Purchasing the text materials and resources is the first step to unify the curriculum, to move our young people forward, and to insure a quality education in every single Torrington elementary school for every single child at every single grade level.
The budget is proposing additional TAG Faculty. She noted that the district spends a tremendous amount of money helping our non English speaking and special education children, and asked that it serve our best and brightest as well.
They would like to expand the summer school opportunities and focus on reading. The proposed model will be able to serve 80 needy children in the area of reading for fewer dollars than in the past. The notion to have summer school in August will give them a jump start to the regular school year. There will be no tuition or transportation charges.
Summer School in the Middle School will focus on Reading, Language Arts, and Math. The purpose of secondary summer school is to provide learning support in an effort to decrease the dropout population.
Summer School for the high school will focus on Math, Science, and Reading and Writing.
They would like additional supplies, materials, and leveled reading books to meet the needs of children at all levels.
They need to continue professional development in Math and Reading so our teachers have the best and most current strategy to address the needs of Torrington’s children.
The sports program will be restored at the Middle School.
Dr. O’Brien noted that the high school accreditation is seriously in question. From her perspective, this budget is absolutely essential to jump start the improvements at the high school so that, over the next few years, we will not only restore the pride of the Torrington public schools but the pride of the community in its flagship high school. The board has already approved the new, hybrid schedule, through Resolution. She promised the rising of test scores. To do that, ten new faculty is proposed, along with a new Guidance Counselor, one Department Head to be split between English and Social Studies, one Department head to be split between Math and Science, and two Quad Leaders who will teach part of the day and work the
other half day with the at-risk population in grades nine and ten.
The proposed budget includes ten additional days in the summer for Guidance Counselors to solve scheduling problems prior to the start of the school year.
Dr. O’Brien stated that the next NEASC visit is in 2007. Because nothing has been done during the past eight years, the administration and high school faculty have ten years of work to do in two. There are very stringent standards and criteria that high schools in New England must meet if they are to be accredited. To achieve full accreditation is nearly impossible because they simply can’t do all that work in two years. What they can do however, is move full speed ahead, do everything to the very best of their ability and demonstrate to the examiners when they come in the fall of 2007 that they are on the right pathway, their drop out rate has declined, their test scores are on the incline, they are serving the needs of all their students better than before, and they will gain a
continuing accreditation. This cannot be accomplished without the support of the proposed budget as presented.
Mayor Bingham turned the meeting to anyone having questions or comments.
Mr. Cornish asked if the dollar value going toward new positions was on the entry level or in the middle of the salary range, and whether or not additional savings were derived from this.
Business Manager Nancy Haynes, indicated that they budgeted between $38,000.00 and $44,000.00 for replacement teachers, depending on the subject matter. In addition, they included an amount to cover the salary differential for those individuals they presently don’t know about, who will be leaving the system. Those savings are reflected in the budget.
Mr. Cornish inquired why some of the positions were transferred from grants funded to general funded.
Mrs. Haynes indicated that, if they were to carry forward all the existing staff at their rates next year and balance it against how much revenue they anticipate from those grants, they would have a $182,000.00 shortfall, primarily due to the decreasing revenues, mostly from Title I. The shortfall had to be made up by the general fund. In addition, in order to cover their projected deficits in the para professional account, they had to strip another federal grant of monies which they anticipated carrying over until next year. They don’t have any carry over funds to use to fund positions for next year.
Mr. Cornish asked what impact the textbook replacement program would have for future funds.
Dr. O’Brien indicated that all K through five teachers were trained during the past school year by representatives from the publisher of the new textbooks in anticipation of receiving these books. From their perspective, the books are essential.
Mr. Farley inquired about the dramatic increase of $208,000.00 in the Occupational Therapist line item from 2006 to 2007.
Mr. Cavegnero said it was a consequence of the IRS audit where they classified people as independent contractors who should have been employees. There is an increase however, because they are proposing an additional occupational therapist.
Mr. Farley inquired about the $117,000.00 increase since the year 2005 in Line Item 5330, Professional Development.
Dr. O’Brien stated that they are centralizing some of their spending, i.e., in textbooks. Dr. Campbell will be the flow-through point for all textbook adoptions, thereby releasing principals in various building from writing textbook orders. The same thing is true for professional development.
Dr. O’Brien explained that consultants were also included in the budget to help the administration with the accreditation process. Unlike many other districts, they don’t have department chairs to help with the curriculum writing or to be teacher leaders, so the consultants will help them in the writing of reports for NEASC and in guiding the faculty on the NEASC process. These consultants have led other high schools to successful accreditation in the past.
Mr. Farley inquired about the increase of $289,000.00 in line item 5561, Special Education Tuition, and whether the school system would obtain more revenue from this.
Mrs. Haynes explained that Director of Pupil Services Judith Babcock has identified each child she anticipates will be out placed during the next year. For a variety of reasons, students who are identified either by the school district or by a state agency, get placed to an outside school, public or private. She has calculated transportation and tuition cost for a total of 71 students identified as out placed students for the coming year. Ironically, the district has a $226,000.00 deficit in that account as of the end of April. She estimated that the $289,000.00 increase was pretty much on target for the upcoming year. Mrs. Babcock and her staff projected the increases in tuition and transportation; that was the basis for the Excess Cost Grant which the State of Connecticut will give to Torrington,
and it’s displayed in the Agency Placement Grant on the revenue side of the budget. Depending on who places the child, determines how much revenue the city will receive. If a state agency places a student, the district and the city are on the hook for the first $10,000.00, the approximate cost to educate a child in Torrington. Anything in excess of the $10,000.00 will come back to the city as revenue. However, the grant is capped. Last year it was capped at 75%.
The current year is capped at 83%. Next year, they are hoping it will be up to 93% as a result of the twenty million dollars the state has put into their budget package.
Mr. O’Connell added that it’s possible that the school district may have to write a check for out placed students’ that’s not included in this budget at all. He noted that there is no way to predict what’s going to occur.
Mrs. Babcock stated that during the current year, they had 29 students out placed by someone other than the district; 17 from DCF, eight students out placed into juvenile justice placements, and four students moved into Torrington who were already out placed. Once they are placed in a facility, the City of Torrington has to pay their tuition. The Board of Education has no control whatsoever over 29 out placed students.
Mr. Farley asked Dr. O’Brien to outline the efficiencies that were offset in the budget to accommodate the additional full time employee teaching positions, including the additional full time employee at the high school, in supporting the accreditation process. He was specifically looking for the dollar figure of the actual savings found elsewhere to balance against the increased cost of the new positions.
Dr. O’Brien explained that she and Mrs. Haynes had always built zero-based budgets. Principals were instructed not to reflect last year’s budget in the formation of their budget, but rather to bring their budgets to the board and the Superintendent based on “zero” and build it as needed for 06-07. Prior to the budgets reaching the Board of Education, adjustments were made, ideas were tested, and the principals were encouraged to find economies within their original budgets. Principals were able to trim hundreds of dollars, yet provide for the needs, services and support of the children. Duplications were eliminated.
Mrs. Haynes reiterated the fact that economies were found by using a zero based budget as opposed to using last year’s figures as their starting point, because some of last year’s figures were over budgeted.
Mr. Cornish inquired about the portables in regard to avoiding the taxation and creation of a surplus in a future year so we don’t have to tax for an expense that we know we’re going to receive revenue for.
Mrs. Haynes indicated that they anticipated removing the portables in July of 2007. If it was Mr. Cornish’s desire to move the expense into the year where we would anticipate getting revenue, in all likelihood, it would have a minimal impact from a financial point of view. Any potential revenue won’t be determined until they apply for the grant, some time next winter or early spring.
Mr. Cornish asked if there were any projected increases in revenues that will help offset the five million dollar change in the bottom line of their budget.
He encouraged the Board of Education to meet with the city and make sure the numbers are balanced so that when the Board of Finance makes a decision on the 23rd, they are working with the best information possible.
Mrs. Haynes said she did plan on meeting once or twice with Comptroller Alice Proulx to review and finalize revenues prior to the mill rate being set. The only change at this point would be the additional revenue generated from the Excess Cost Grant, if it went to a 90% reimbursement. That would generate an additional $120,000.00 for that particular agency placement grant. She informed the board that they did not include any revenue from the Forbes portables in their school construction grant amount.
Mr. Farley inquired how the Board of Education stood with the current budget.
Mrs. Haynes indicated that a $267,000.00 shortfall was anticipated; $200,000.00 in electricity and $226,000.00 in special ed out placements. Obviously offset monies will bring it down to $267,000.00. The Board of Education hoped to be addressing that matter in the near future.
Mr. Cavegnero promised the Board of Finance that they would be pro active in reviewing the special education costs versus their statutory obligations in the months ahead in the hope that they can find efficiencies and find better ways of regionalizing, if possible. They hoped to meet with the Board of Finance to have an open, frank conversation on the matter once they have an accurate landscape of special education and what those costs’ mean to the city so everyone can understand how those costs become one of the primary budget drivers.
Mr. Bushka inquired whether Dr. O’Brien could identify how much, dollars wise, was one time expense and what might be ongoing in terms of the accreditation.
Dr. O’Brien indicated that the consultants will continue next year. Once the NEASC examiners have visited Torrington High School in the fall of 2007, they will ask for evidence supporting what was written in the report. They will furnish the Board of Education with a list of improvements that has to be worked on over the next ten years. What you would then see in the long run is a smaller amount of money dedicated to certain improvements over the next decade. It won’t be nearly as large as what they are seeking in the proposed budget.
Dr. O’Brien further stated that they would like the high school to be more comprehensive. There are a significant number of young people for whom the military, the trade school, or the vocational school would be appropriate. She wanted to honor all the young people from Torrington and not only those going on to college. As a comprehensive high school, they need to create another set of electives in order to hold those students so they can leave with productive attitudes, skills, and introductions to trades and vocations. Currently, the high school does not offer those electives within the curriculum.
Small increments will be included in the next three to five budgets as they augment the curriculum and offerings at the high school to capture the interests and abilities of all our young people.
Mr. Nader inquired about the increases in energy costs.
Mrs. Haynes indicated that all fuel was previously lumped into heating. The accounting has now been realigned with the New World financial system to be consistent with the reporting and accounting mechanisms that are required for educational facilities.
Mr. Nader inquired about the technology software.
Mrs. Haynes stated that this was another area that was realigned in order to record the way it should be. Her guess was that it appeared in the technical services account in the past.
Mr. Nader asked what prompted the significant increase in dues and fees, line item 5510.
Mrs. Haynes indicated that part of the cost is for CABE, which is equivalent to CCM on the municipal side. A large chunk of money goes to Education Connection as well. These are regional service centers that provide services to districts in their regions. It also includes paying for the taping of the board’s meetings and minutes, which had substantial overruns in this particular account during the current year. She also stated that all of the dues and entry fees for athletics at the high school level were carried in the supply line item for some reason. It was reflected properly in the proposed budget.
Dr. O’Brien indicated that they would furnish the board with more details on this matter.
Mr. Nader inquired how the Board of Education managed to get a $30,000.00 reduction in their liability insurance, line item 5520.
Mrs. Haynes admitted that she honestly didn’t ask questions when she saw the decrease, but speculated that it might be because they only have one open case at the moment.
Mr. Zeller inquired about the one time hits that could be expected.
Dr. O’Brien indicated that there is one time cost associated with NEASC that will go away in the 2007 budget. Their curriculum needs, however, will be ongoing costs until they get it lined up to where it needs to be. The math piece is the first step in that direction. For example, in the past, the high school had curriculum maps that were guidelines as to what to teach. Those are not acceptable to NEASC. They are not a high enough level of sophistication and specification to rise to the standard of approval. The curriculum at Torrington High School needs to be redefined. A multiple year plan will be devised whereby a certain amount of money will be dedicated to work on the curriculum until they get to where they need to be.
Mr. Cavegnero indicated that they will not anticipate hiring ten new teachers at the high school next year. That staffing pattern should serve them well for a long time to come. Some costs, like the consultants, will phase out after a period of time.
Dr. O’Brien indicated that the ten new faculty will be the jump start necessary to get the schedule going. Although she won’t ask for ten new faculty next year, she may ask for two more so their elective program can be more fully articulated. She said, “In the past, after you kind of do an initial hit and take care of things and get on a more even keel, you could be looking at maybe 1.5% a year. You’re not going to be looking at something pushing 3%. By having a longer runway too, to plan the improvements, you can break them into small pieces over time. Part of our urgency here is because that team is visiting us in the fall of 2007. Otherwise, we could be a little bit more planfull about this.”
Mr. Zeller asked where Torrington fell when compared to other towns in terms of ERG.
Dr. O’Brien indicated that the latest data collected by the state, Torrington dropped from ERG F to ERG G, which indicates that our test scores, and some of our social indicators like free school lunch are causing us to fall. She noted that they were not doing well on test scores when compared with ERG F schools. Their drop out rate was high. Several things were very low in their ERG when compared to small cities. She made the same comparison when they moved to ERG G and they are still low. That was a real wake-up call.
Mr. Zeller inquired where Torrington stood on a per pupil basis.
Dr. O’Brien indicated that they wanted the dollars to be dedicated directly to service the children rather than to augment the administrative ranks. In fact, all new positions before the board are all teachers. She noted that Forbes School is getting very large and needs a second administrator. Her intention is to transfer from within the ranks instead of asking for another supervisor.
Mr. Cavegnero stated that public education today is perhaps as much about providing social services as it is about providing education. This system has really changed. Higher ERG communities typically have a much higher ratio of two parents with higher education who are able to provide and share that with their children. As you go down the ERG rankings, you find the inverse of that scenario. They constantly find themselves investing more and more of their resources in early intervention and after school programs to try to bolster what is not as essential in higher ERG communities.
It is not just the dollar amount, the per pupil cost, that’s a factor in the success of a public education system. It is parental involvement, family involvement, and it’s consistency of what is taught in the school that needs to be reinforced at home.
Mr. Zeller said the Board of Education is telling the Board of Finance that the accreditation at the high school is in jeopardy if they don’t receive the funds. If, in 2007, the accreditation is no longer in jeopardy, would it be fair to say from a budgetary perspective in going forward at that point in time, that the consequences could be greater in 2007 in trying to get re-accredited.
Dr. O’Brien said “Absolutely.” She noted that they have a chance of saving the accreditation now in moving forward. If they wait until they are on death’s door, it’s going to cost the city a whole lot more and it will be a de-spiriting thing for our teachers and community. The Board of Finance’s support for changing the schedule, for textbooks, for richer curriculums are all positive things that NEASC is going to look at very closely.
Mrs. Haynes indicated that the costs for the high school improvements on scheduling and NEASC, which are intertwined, are $606,000.00. If they don’t have the money this year, they will need it in 2007, which will probably be closer to $750,000.00, plus all the things that may come about as a result of waiting.
Mr. Nader noted that there were many fresh faces in the board’s administration. Despite that, how could the budget be process dependent rather than people dependent. What happens if we have new faces again next year?
Dr. O’Brien said someone needs to be watching the store, and that team of people includes the Superintendent, the Assistant Superintendent, the High School Principal, and department chairs at the high school. They work closely with the faculty to monitor improvements, curriculums, programming, etc. It’s the responsibility of the administration to make sure they know where they are in the accreditation process. The board is furnishing quarterly reports to NEASC on how they are addressing those standards that indicate how far along they are in achieving their goals. The Board of Education will monitor it closely as well.
Elinor Carbone, member of the budget committee, stated that it would be incumbent upon them to make it an ongoing goal to assess exactly where they are in terms of NEASC. They should inform the Board of Finance of the results as well.
Mr. Cavegnero commended the budget committee for their long hours and hard work, as well as Bruce Cornish, the Board of Finance’s liaison to the Board of Education for his dedication.
Mayor Bingham thanked the Board of Education and the administration for presenting such a detailed budget.
On a motion by Mr. Farley, seconded by Mr. Nader, the board voted unanimously to adjourn at 7:00 p.m.
ATTEST: JOLINE LeBLANC
ASST. CITY CLERK
| 
