Last night, the Board of Finance endured an hour or so of public comments on the Board of Ed budget proposal. To recap, the BofE is asking for a 6%+ increase for FY12, which follows the 4%+ increase in FY11 which followed the 3.6% increase in FY10, the 6.4% increase in FY09 and the 7.0% increase in FY08. Over the past five years that would be a 31% increase in the budget (from $58 million in FY07 to $75 million plus in F12). Student growth over the same time period is 6%. Despite rapid growth in the budget, test scores are about the same, graduation rates about the same which leads to the obvious question: Where is this money going?
Speaker after speaker warned of the dire consequences if the Board of Finance didn't approve the BofE budget as is. They warned of the per pupil spending gap between Darien and our peer group. They warned of the dangerous trend in the operating budget.
We'll save the first warning for last and quickly dispose of the second two warnings. There is a gap between per student spending in Darien and our DRG, but it is driven by things like transportation, administration and plant operation and maintenance. Teacher spending per pupil is by far, we estimate upwards of 60%, the most important aspect of per pupil spending. Teacher spending per pupil is driven by teacher salaries and student/teacher ratios. Teacher salaries in Darien are pretty much the same as in other districts and class size in Darien is pretty much the same as in the other districts. You can point to instances where Darien has higher class sizes, but overall, there isn't a significant difference. The warning about the operating budget is a perfect example of the tail wagging the dog. The "operating" budget we are being warned of, and different numbers have been presented, is usually discussing a very narrow, and very minor aspect of the budget and positing that expenditures dealing with $1 million of a $75 million budget is the canary in the coal mine. Please.
So what is it? Why is this budget growing at 6% with less than 1% enrollment growth? And why has it been growing at 5x the enrollment growh rate for so many years? Only one person addressed this issue. Personnel costs are the largest component of the budget, and years ago, the BofE and RTM approved a multi-year contract that promised a 4% salary increase. After that, there's not much to argue about. We can do absolutely nothing new and pay 4% more than last year. Or we can add on some other things and pay 6% more, or we can cut heads and increase the budget less than 4%.
What's surprising to us is why this receives very little attention. Why isn't the BofE apologizing and promising they will operate differently so we don't face further budget increases, where as speaker after speaker after speaker remarked, "there are no new programs in this budget." Really? How can we pay 6%+ more for something and get NOTHING in return. Who negotiated that deal? Whoever it was, and whoever voted for that deal, did the town a dis-service.
Afterwards the Board of Finance approved a new gym floor for Middlesex, reducing the FY12 budget by spending the money this year.
And finally, The Shuffle.
Last week's Board of Finance meeting was quite exciting. The Board of Selectman asked for $300,000 or so, then $60,000 or so from the Contingency Fund to purchase architect drawings for the Shuffle. Martha Banks objected and, in our opinion laid our brilliantly, why the Shuffle is a truly bad idea. The vote was tied due to the absence of Murray Stegelmann.
Murray was available this week. Dave Campbell asked for $60,000, then $120,000, then another $200,000. It seems the numbers change every time someone opens his or her mouth on this subject. We think the Board approved $120,000.
Here's what we don't understand. Why is this coming from the contingency fund? This has been a project long advocated by the Board of Selectman. What possible reasoning do they have for tapping the contingency fund? We're not one for conspiracy theories, but it seems the strategy is to get the town half-pregnant on this project rather than go through the arduous process of building consensus on the need for this move.
A final thought. The pie, at least in the short-run is fixed. More for the Board of Ed, means less for the town, for things like the Shuffle, Police Station, Weed Beach, etc. We can increase the pie by increasing taxes, but we have difficulty supporting that as a fiscal solution.
