Following last night’s tandem meeting extravaganza, I caught up with BOE members to discus what transpired while I typed away at the common council member. It seems seismic shifts of positions are abounding on the BOE. The operating budget drew a 4-4-1 vote because of a couple of factors. First, some BOE members, notably Rivas and Mosbey felt that they were not given enough time to review the budget following its introduction. Rivas was the abstention and Chiaramonte, Kimmel, Iannacone, and Mosbey were the votes.
But that was the final vote, Leading up to it were motions put forth by Kimmel to increase funding for the health wellness program and for adding a finance director. The health wellness program motion was approved 8-1 with Jody Bishsop-Pullan the lone no vote. Pullan said she didn’t believe in the wellness program, probably because of her extensive experience as a dental hygienist, and preferred that a nurse get hired instead.
Only Chairamonte, Kimmel and Iannacone voted for the finance director but Kimmel explained later that the general feeling on the board was that it was important to continue discussions about the need for the position, and thus Greg Burnett agreed to hold published, monthly finance/budget committee meetings. This is a huge seismic shift on the board. Kimmel stated that other members were slowly coming around to the realization that the hierarchy of Opdahl reporting to Corda as COO and preparing the budget was shifting too much time away form core responsibilities like operations and going into the schools. I suspect that the more rigorous academic mind of Susan Hamilton, as chair, is influencing some of this new directional thinking. Previous chair Jody Bishop-Pullan just couldn’t think through the real issues at stake and succumbed to misguided allegiances to Corda and some odd concept that the role of the BOE is to suck up to administration instead of managing administration.
Bruce Melion and Kimmel seperately agreed that the lurking cambridge report systematically points out the deficiencies of Corda’s lack of involvement in the schools which in turn has documented the reality that Corda and Opdahl have combined to render a disservice to the educational programs because they are in over their heads in budget process.
Meliion also indicated that the court case over the contract extension for Corda has another hearing in federal court on the 16th of January.
Overall, according to Kimmel, last year’s budget vote took 20 minutes to a half hour. This year after they spent close to 3 hours on the discussion. While this is an important and promising direction to see, there are still some issues. Burnett’s arguments that the BOE not vote to reduce the capital spending request is a good example. he claimed in his argument, that the BET will attempt to whittle down the request anyways, so they might as well start with the higher projected request. By making that argument he failed to understand the key point that was hotly debated in last year’s budget cycle, which was that the BOE presented an “nonnegotiable” budget with no attempts at reigning in costs. The cost savings mantra will crop up again this year. Without proforma budget statements, and acceptable financial reporting, the BOE fails to capitalize on any fiscal cost savings they may be achieving. By not working the PR angle of showing good faith negotiations, they are losing the opportunity to show the city, the council, the BET and the residents that they are attempting to manage budgets with the best interests of the schools and the taxpayers. That argument, notably did not make the Hour’s report this morning:
Kimmel amended his motion twice to reduce by $570,149 the capital budget request. The motion failed, but the capital budget was passed as written by eight of the nine BOE members.
This point on the capital budget is an important one, and one that should carry forth between the council and the BET. Having Kimmel push for better cooperation between the BOE, council and BET is the real story here. Meanwhile, only Iannacone voted against the final capital budget number, earning my distinction of a “gold star” for holding firm on the point. Chairamonte voted for the final capital budget instead of joining with Iannacone on the no vote.
The motion made by BOE member Gregory Burnett reinstated the Wellness Program by a vote of 8-1 that was initially rejected due to high costs. The board unanimously agreed the program would be beneficial in increasing the morale of staff, reducing absenteeism and recruiting teachers from top-tier universities.
“The long-term effects it could have would be recruitment and retention and it would attribute as to how we maintain or try to maintain top-tier teachers,” Burnett said.
The $55,000 initiative for the Wellness Program will also provide physical activity and incentives for all education employees.
“We may have to find ourselves making reductions (after BET looks at the budget),” Corda said. “This may be something we have to forego. We would like to pursue what grant opportunities may be available for the implementation of a Wellness Program.”
Debate ensued over BOE member Bruce Kimmel’s proposal to hire a finance director. On Tuesday, The Hour reported that Kimmel would propose a $120,000 salary and line item be added to the operating budget for a finance director.
“If we had a regularly-scheduled monthly budget meeting, these things would be discussed, but we don’t have that,” Kimmel said. “It’s not a question of competency or qualifications, but of being spread too thin. I’m talking about somebody that would be directly under the superintendent. Someone who would do all the legwork with budget.”
While BOE members Burnett, Jody Bishop-Pullian and others pressed the need for more information, member Migdalia Rivas presented minutes from a 2003 meeting where those board members elected not to hire a finance director. The salary for a finance director that year was $118,194.
“What does that person know about a child failing in school?” asked Rivas. “As a board we should strengthen accountability. It’s the finance committee’s job to look through line items (in the budget).”
It is possible the salary for a finance director could be modified with fringe benefits as the BOE attracts candidates, Corda said.
Discussion continued as Jack Chiaramonte noted the superintendent and BOE “can’t play a numbers game.”
“I’m suggesting we don’t add this dollar amount to our existing budget,” said Burnett. “Until the budget committee comes back with our research with a more accurate number for salary and associated benefits — and if we as a board felt there was a critical need — then that’s something we need to find the dollars for. There are various options we have that we could do without changing the budget now before it goes to the (Board of Estimate of Taxation).”
Ultimately the motion was defeated, 5-4.
The Advocate reported:
Crafting a budget takes several months and is straining the district’s top administrators, including Superintendent Salvatore Corda, Kimmel said.
“I watched last year as the budget process unfolded,” Kimmel said. “I think we have a situation that’s not fair to the superintendent and the chief operating officer. It spreads them too thin. . . . I want to create the time and the energy so the superintendent can be in the schools as much as possible.”
Other board members disagreed, saying the budget request will be highly scrutinized by the city and that a finance director may not be necessary.
Board member Greg Burnett said the idea should be studied further before it is added into the budget, especially because there has been concern among the public about the number of central office staff.
“We’re not in a state of crisis,” Burnett said. “We have a (budget) book here that has been recognized by the state of Connecticut as an exemplary communication tool. In my opinion, things are not falling through the cracks.”
source: The Hour, Moccia breaks stalemate BOE budget vote with ‘yes’ January 9, 2008
source: Advocate, Moccia breaks tie on $149.6M school budget, By Lisa Chamoff, January 9 2008
