YourCT.com header image 2

Guest View: How to put school board’s fiscal house in order


by turfgrrl


November 27th, 2007 · 18 Comments

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 a issue. That can’t happen without valuable contributions from our readers.

How to put school board’s fiscal house in order

By BRUCE KIMMEL

It’s that time of year again. The various departments that comprise our municipal government are busy working on budget requests for the 2008-09 fiscal year. And, of course, that includes the Board of Education, whose budget makes up roughly 55 percent of the city’s total operating expenses. In order to avoid the acrimony and confusion that characterized last year’s budget debate, I would suggest the following:

The Board’s Finance Committee should begin meeting soon, and should continue meeting until the budget cycle is complete. At the initial meeting, Superintendent Corda could provide an overview of the budget situation; what circumstances have changed, what fiscal pressures need to be addressed, etc. It would also provide an opportunity for board members to express their concerns.

It would be helpful if a member of the Common Council attended the board’s Finance Committee meetings. Conversely, a member of the board might attend the council’s Finance Committee meetings. It is extremely important for both sides to appreciate the diverse needs confronting the city — from the numerous legal mandates and contractual obligations that the school board must fund, to the rising debt service, insurance, energy and infrastructure costs facing the city.

I would also strongly suggest that early on in the budget process, Tom Hamilton, the city’s Finance Director, attend a Board of Education Finance Committee meeting. Board members need to be sensitive to the city’s overall fiscal framework and what the city can and cannot afford. And Hamilton needs to have a comprehensive understanding of the fiscal pressures on the board.

Based on last year’s budget discussion, I believe the board’s Finance Committee, besides analyzing the superintendent’s budget proposals, should decide whether the upcoming budget should contain a formal contingency fund and whether the board should hire a full-time finance director. (Naturally, any decision by the committee would have to be approved by the full board.)
I firmly believe the board needs to hire a full-time finance director. Last year, Superintendent Corda was tied up for months with budget issues that could easily have been handled by a finance director. Having a full-time finance person would allow the superintendent to spend more time in the schools. Moreover, a full-time finance director, besides being in constant communication with the superintendent, would be able to work closely with the board’s Finance Committee, Hamilton and the mayor, as well as other city agencies.

In recent years, the board’s operating budget has not contained a formal contingency fund to address the problems and shortfalls that arise naturally in the course of a fiscal year. Not having such a line, yet still being able to find sufficient funds for these unforeseen developments, has led to the belief that the board’s budget is padded. Last year, the downward adjustment of “projections” during the reconciliation process reinforced this view.

Inclusion of a formal contingency fund in the budget would probably require adjustments in other budget lines or perhaps the elimination of some line items. But in the long run, having a contingency, with strict rules for withdrawals, would help restore creditability to the board with regard to fiscal matters.

For more than two years, I have privately and publicly argued that the several committees of the Board of Education, particularly its Finance Committee, should meet on a regularly scheduled, monthly basis. I still do not know for sure how board members feel about this proposal. I assume the majority is against it because, in their view, a vibrant committee system would lead to micromanagement of the superintendent and his deputies. Obviously, I don’t subscribe to such a view.

I believe that monthly committee meetings would enable board members to acquire the kind of detailed knowledge of the school system, especially its finances, that the public expects of them. Plus, regular committee meetings would provide the public ample opportunities to become better informed about educational and fiscal issues.

Last year, the board’s Finance Committee did not meet once during the initial phase of the budget process; thus, the full board voted for the superintendent’s budget request without that request being examined in detail by the committee. I certainly hope that is not the case this year.

Bruce Kimmel is a member of the Norwalk Board of Education and is a former president of the city’s Common Council.

Tags: Education · In the News · Norwalk

18 Responses so far “Guest View: How to put school board’s fiscal house in order”



  • 1 anon // Nov 27, 2007 at 9:58 am

    1. The BOE budget takes up more than 60% of operating expenses.
    2. The budgeting process needs to be totally open.
    3. A Finance Director should be independently hired by the City and not be beholden to Corda and the BOE.

    Most importantly, you do not have the credibility, much less the moral authority, to offer ANY reform suggestions until you explain to the citizens of Norwalk why Corda’s contract was revealed only five minutes before a vote was taken. By that action, I calculate that you spent nearly $1million of taxpayers’ money (the contract value over its term)by pulling the wool over our eyes. I believe that you and the other remaining pre-election Board members should resign.

    No, I am not a teacher!

  • 2 anonymous // Nov 27, 2007 at 10:09 am

    FYI That action onCorda’s contract was done in an during a SPECIAL meeting that was called in haste after the teachers BOO’ed Corda at the Convocation meeting. With all due respect, that meeting was called so fast after that booing of Corda that I know Kimmel was unable to attend. I would look to see which BOE members attend that meeting, see how they voted, then take out your anger at them directly at the next BOE meeting this Monday Dec.3rd @ 7:45 during the public participation portion of the agenda. Kimmel had no part of this sham. Lets put the Blame on those who “rubber stamped” Corda’s contract.

  • 3 Anon // Nov 27, 2007 at 11:00 am

    Because Kimmel couldn’t attend doesn’t mean that had he attended he would have objected to the Board’s procedural deception. In my post, I forgot to mention the BOE’s sneaky petition for removal of the lawsuit from state to federal court so as to prevent a hearing on the lawsuit that was originally scheduled before the election on October 29.

  • 4 Anonymous // Nov 27, 2007 at 11:10 am

    #3 In case you haven’t noticed, Bruce Kimmel is not so endeared by the rest of the Board. At the first meeting with the new Board members, the voting for the chair was pretty much 6-3. Kimmel voting with the 2 new BoE members. After the BOE Debacle this past year, you’d think the board would of looked for a fresh start, but the core voted to re-suffle the old executive committee instead. So much for the Old BOE members listening to the public.

  • 5 barnstorm // Nov 27, 2007 at 11:24 am

    #1, you seem to have a problem with Mr Kimmel’s suggestions. If a member of the BOE can’t suggest improvements in the way things are done, would you be in favor of asking somebody even more out of the loop? Or are your motivations simply political in nature?

    I think Mr Kimmel’s suggestions that the various Boards and agencies share communications and input is something that is way overdue.It’s high time we got everyone in the BOE AND City Hall working towards a common goal: what’s best for the schools and the kids, as well as the City.

    And for the record, I’m not only NOT a teacher, but I don’t have any kids in the school system, past, present or future.If so much of our tax dollars are to be spent on education, it’s imperative there be as much transparency and accountability as possible.

  • 6 Anon // Nov 27, 2007 at 11:44 am

    I agree that it’s imperative there be as much transparency and accountability as possible, but a call for such coming from a member of a municipal agency that has vied for opacity and exemption is duplicitous, if not absurd.

  • 7 Anonymous // Nov 27, 2007 at 12:11 pm

    Prior to the elections, Kimmel was the only one to stand up and point out the problems. Hell, he even left his party affiliation over it. Give the man some credit. He has two new members that see the issues as he does. Lets hope there are some other members there that will have the same values as they do. Maybe these other Board members will open their eyes and STOP being lead by the nose by Corda. This ISN’T a party issue, as nothing should be on the Board, (You would never of guess it by the 6-3 voting LOL) These are issues affecting parents, teachers, students & taxpayers. The Board hopefully has this in mind.

  • 8 Anonymous // Nov 27, 2007 at 1:17 pm

    If Kimmel stays the course and gets this much attention maybe he should be our next mayor, clearly he is someones way, he is not in this for the money nor the power Norwalk has none.

  • 9 Vet Park Junkie // Nov 27, 2007 at 3:56 pm

    Bruce, you are on target with your proposals. I have a process question for you. When I look at the school budget requests on-line I see three years of budgets presented: 2 year ago Actual Expenses, Prior Year Budget request, & current year budget request. Two things seem to be missing that would make the decisions more accurate. First, for the budgets that are two years old, both budgeted and actual would help you understand how close the budget process is to actual. Second, the actual expenses for the prior year should be provided. I expect that there are issues around “closing” the prior year budgets and that these issues are used to delay presentation of actual/budget expenses. If you are only given the -2 year actual, -1 year budget, current budget; then you have very little to evaluate if the budget estimates are good. Is this really the case or do you get more accurate reports?

    These issues have been resolved by most everyone and a Finance Director will be able to provide on-going budget-to-actual reports as the year progresses.

  • 10 Watchdog // Nov 27, 2007 at 5:03 pm

    Please. Bruce Kimmel is well aware of the controversy surrounding the BOE right now and his is hardly a glamorous spot to be in. Give the man credit. He has seen the board from both sides and understands how crucial communication is between the city and board. It is true that many may not be aware of the legalities and mandates imposed by the state upon education. If we are to address this public outcry for transparency, surely we would benefit from the whole picture.

    Thanks, Bruce.

  • 11 anon432 // Nov 28, 2007 at 4:40 pm

    Did Mr. Quinn retire or was he pushed out by Corda and company? Why are people in charge of such an enormous budget who have NO financial experience?

  • 12 Norwalker // Nov 28, 2007 at 5:03 pm

    I don’t think John Quinn left on his own accorda.

  • 13 United Arab Emirates // Nov 28, 2007 at 5:56 pm

    He left in a Civic.

  • 14 Anonymous // Nov 28, 2007 at 6:01 pm

    Mr. Quinn’s job was eliminated in a budget reconciliation several years ago. He was stunned to lose his job; it was definitely not his choice to leave. Mr. Quinn was meticulous, a very thorough professional. The Norwalk Public Schools were far better off when he was here.

  • 15 Anonymous // Nov 28, 2007 at 7:11 pm

    West Rocks Middle School

    http://www.yourct.com/newzee/2007/11/25/norwalk-new-boe-post/

  • 16 anon432 // Nov 29, 2007 at 10:49 pm

    #14 I agree with you. He was professional, helpful and direct. He and Emma were terrific and thoughtful- if a teacher needed anything they found a way for that item to get purchased. They truly were in it for the good of the children.

  • 17 BOE Anon // Nov 30, 2007 at 6:00 am

    The former finance director for the BOE was not “let go”, the position was eliminated. Often, when someone has an employee who is not performing to someones expectations, they cut the position as opposed to dealing with the real issue. In this particular case it was the person, not the position. While I believe that a finance director for the BOE is essential, the former director deserved what he got!

  • 18 Anonymous // Nov 30, 2007 at 8:51 am

    #17: I don’t know enough to judge the former finance director, but do you think that we are better off now? If the former director deserved to have his job eliminated, what does the current chief operating officer deserve?

Leave a Reply