Portsmouth schools approve 2008 budget

Superintendent Lusi presents budget
Superintendent Susan Lusi presents budget to school committee (L-R) Dick Carpender, Sylvia Wedge, Terri Cortvriend, Jamie Heaney. (not pictured: Michael Buddemeyer, Marge Levesque)

About fifteen residents and parents were at the Middle School library tonight to hear the Portsmouth School Committee review and accept the proposed budget for next year which, at $34,611,083, came in under the Paiva-Weed cap at an increase of 3.47%. But to make those numbers, the budget includes cuts that are deep and painful.

"I feel a little bit like the grim reaper," said Superintendent Susan Lusi as she presented the budget to the committee. "We're working to provide students an education of high and even increasing quality in a context of declining resources. And it's not an easy task."

Lusi noted that the final recommended budget, which must be delivered to the Town tomorrow morning, is the result of months of work by the Finance Subcommittee and administration (especially, Lusi, noted, the relatively new Director of Finance Chris Tague) with input from the school principals and staff.

"At 3.47%," Lusi noted, "This is below the cost of living increase of 4.1%." Earlier this year, she noted, the committee was anticipating a budget gap of as much as $835K, which they managed to close through a series of cuts, although in many areas, their hands were tied.

"We are legally required to contribute to state retirement, and this year, the dollar amount, $211K, amounts to 18.3% of the total allowable increase for the schools. Utilities are anticipated to increase by $150K," said Lusi. These fixed costs sent the schools looking for cuts in staff, which will see a net reduction of 6.73 full-time equivalents (with 10.73 positions eliminated and 4 positions reallocated) for a total savings of $420K.

The cuts don't stop there. One school nurse will be cut from the elementary schools, requiring that all medically fragile children be reassigned to the one school which will have a full time position. All funding for middle school sports, including coaches and transportation will be cut, as will late bus runs at the middle and high school.

There is also, Lusi noted, another $168,147 in adjustments that need to be made. "These are cuts yet to be identified as our financial information becomes clearer over the spring." Lusi noted that even deeper cuts would have been required if not for two things — moderately declining student enrollment and use of positive fund balance generated in 06-07.

In brief comments before the committee voted, Finance chair Dick Carpender was frank about the difficulties they had faced. "We're in a position now with the assumption of level funding by the state, and the reality of S3050 [Paiva-Weed] taking us down to 5% on the levy, there's just not a lot of money. My fear is that every year we're going to be looking at this in the future. Next year when the cap decreases to 4.75%, we're going to be facing the same dilemma."

School committee chair Sylvia Wedge made a point of thanking the community for pitching in. "If not for the parent-teacher organizations and boosters, this situation would be much more grim," said Wedge. "They contribute thousands of dollars. If it were't for them I don't know what else would be cut."

Parent Dawn Cardero spoke what many were probably thinking. "My husband and I chose this town specifically for the schools," she said. "I have one of those medically fragile children. How am I going to go home to my first grader, and tell him that because of a condition that he has no control over he's going to have to leave all his friends and move to a different school?"

Wedge acknowledged the issue. "The school committee has had these discussions. These cuts are painful," she said. "I personally am very distressed over sports in the middle schools."

The committee voted unanimously to approve the budget "with regret."

In other business, the school calendar for next year was approved, with a start date of September 2, and a two-week December vacation, one week in February, and one week in April.

The committee also passed a motion in support of the Town Council's intent to restripe East Main Road north of Turnpike, converting it to two lanes, in light of safety concerns and the recent accident involving a PHS student.

That's the facts. If you don't want the commentary, you can just stop reading now. The things that parent Dawn Cardero said really struck me. This is not about the PCC or SOS anymore. We're not in the abstract world of tax levies and Town Charters. The Tent Meeting is history, and it's time to move on from that rhetoric. This is about our children. About making decisions that shape their education, that impact the quality of the schools where they spend their days, about who will teach them and what support services they will have. And also about why their parents will want to choose Portsmouth as a place to live and support with their tax dollars. And I am absolutely sick at the idea that we will have to take children away from their friends and move them to different schools.

Sure, kids survive. They adapt. We have to make tough decisions to keep the system functioning for all the students in the district. But why. When we have the money — and do not tell me that with a median home price of $367,000 Portsmouth does not have the money — the idea that we are legally prevented from helping our children is offensive.

I wish Senator Teresa Paiva-Weed had been there to hear Dawn Cardero. I really would like to hear what she would have said. Maybe she could explain to a first grader why they need to leave their friends behind. I can't.

Comments

John:

you said: "the idea that we are legally prevented from helping our children is offensive."

I agree completely. But, the "legally prevented" part has nothing to do with Portsmouth or any local governemnt. Are you upset? Good! But nothing we tell our local town council or school committee is going to change that.

Simply put, the STATE laws have to change. A few examples: Massachusetts lets towns charge a fee for school bussing. There's waivers for low income folks, so it works OK, but in Rhode Island state law prevents towns from charging at all. If we could offset bus costs by a fee, maybe we could pay for middle school sports (another thing we can't charge a fee for). Another example: when I take my kid to see a nurse at a clinic, that's a "office visit" and my insurance is charged. When a kid goes to see the school nurse, can the schools charge the insurance company to pay for that office visit? No. Why? You guessed it, state law.

The list goes on and on. The community's hands are tied BY THE STATE and the people who tie those knots are not feeling the pressure of the citizens because we keep showing up at the school comittee meetings and town council meetings when we should be organizing an angry march on the state house.

OK... I'll stop ranting now...

Hi, Portsmouth Citizen...
Well said. That's what I was trying to get at, not very articulately, which is why I was pointing at Paiva-Weed. Keeping the growth of property taxes under control is a legitimate aim, but the specific legislation that implements it is wreaking havoc, and Portsmouth is far from the worst-hit town in the state. You're right that we should be seeking redress from the legislature.

And that's why I think we need to get past the Tent Meeting/PCC vs. SOS rhetoric. We really do have common ground here. We both want our government and schools to be efficient, and nobody wants to pay more than their fair share of taxes. If the state is not doing what they should — and they are clearly not providing the funding they are legally obligated to under RIGL 16-69 — then it is in the best interests of all the citizens of the town to collectively push for change in Providence.

Another questionable state mandate bears directly on this: school nurses. Could the school district have one certified nurse teacher to deliver curriculum, but staff the other elementaries with lower-cost (but still fully qualified) non-teacher nursing personnel, for example? You might be able to provide coverage that way, but here's the law that ties our hands: RIGL 16-21.

Best,
-j