This is part of an ongoing series of guest posts about issues in Norwalk. yourCT.com is a non-partisan site dedicated to airing all sides of an issue. That can’t happen without valuable contributions from our readers.
Discussions could ease school budget process
A number of interesting questions emerged during the discussion of the Board of Education’s operating budget, some general, some detailed. I hope we — that is, the Board of Education, the public, the mayor, and other city agencies — can address some of these issues in the coming months. Below, in no particular order, are some of the more general questions I believe need to be addressed:
What is the board’s role in determining what will be cut, the amount of the cuts, and when those cuts will be announced? This issue emerged when school Superintendent Salvatore Corda — at a Common Council meeting — announced a detailed list of program and staff reductions that would have to be made if the BOE’s overall budget request were substantially reduced. At the time, there had been no discussion among board members about reductions; nor had we discussed Corda’s controversial decision to not cut any administrators.
About a week later, the superintendent announced that new information had enabled him to reduce the BOE’s budget request from a 7.7 percent increase in spending to 6.23 percent; soon after, he lowered that to about 5.9 percent. While I definitely applaud Corda for reducing spending, I believe proper protocol requires the board to formally discuss and approve any reductions in its budget before they are announced.
What is the role of the board’s Finance Committee during the development of the superintendent’s initial budget recommendation? The Finance Committee did not meet once while the superintendent and his staff were preparing their initial budget recommendation, which was presented to the full board in the beginning of January. My experience on the Common Council’s Finance Committee, from 1997 to 2005, leads me to believe that detailed committee discussions provide the type of knowledge necessary to fully understand and evaluate the superintendent’s recommendation.
What is the relationship between the BOE, especially its Finance Committee, and the Council’s Finance Committee and the Board of Estimate? It goes without saying that the BOE is an independent agency of the state and that only it has line-item authority over its budget. Nonetheless, the Council and the BET determine the overall size of the BOE budget and its impact on taxpayers. Thus, I believe it is necessary for these bodies to meet on regular basis — as equals — in order to constructively discuss the many fiscal issues facing the city.
As indicated above, I believe that the board’s Finance Committee could have discussed a number of detail-ed budget issues. Below are several that emerged during this year’s debate:
There is a need to examine ways to increase the accuracy of enrollment projections early in the budget cycle. During the budget reconciliation process in early June, a rather large number of staff reductions were proposed based on lower enrollment projections. This raised questions about the initial projections.
There is a need to break down, examine and determine the overall cost of our special education programs. Staff reductions in special education, totaling about $1.3 million, were proposed in early June. In January, when the board approved the superintendent’s request, I was under the impression that all special education requests were mandated by law and Individual Education Plans and were thus untouchable.
There is a need to better understand the multitude of line items of the various central office departments. A cursory look at the board’s budget book will show numerous items that receive little or no attention because they are relatively small. Many items, with names like “Temp Part-Time Help,” “Other Prof Tech Services,” and “Other Supplies and Mater,” add up to a lot of money. In one central office department, there is a line for “Supplies” right above the line for “General Supplies.”
There is a need to meet periodically with the board’s insurance consultant to develop an accurate understanding of health insurance costs and issues. Insurance issues are costly and complex. It behooves Finance Committee members to grasp the legal issues and trends in this area. During the budget reconciliation process in June, it was announced that the board could achieve savings from “updated renewals” in medical benefits to the tune of $1.5 million. That raised questions about the initial projections.
There is a need to discuss problems associated with crafting a large budget without a contingency fund. During the reconciliation, Superintendent Corda and board members acknowledged that unanticipated situations arise during the course of any academic year and that money needs to be found to address these situations. Since the board generally does not request special appropriations from the city, members of the public and other city agencies often assume that various board accounts are padded.
These are just a few of the issues that I believe the board needs to address in the coming months. Of course, there are others — such as the board and city combining operations in areas like purchasing, or the possibility of the board hiring a full-time finance director. The important point is to begin the discussion and move forward.
Bruce Kimmel is a member of the Board of Education.
