Grim projections on school funding in ’10

Forced to reduce School Dept. spending by $2.8m in the next school year, Belmont’s public school system would be forced to make drastic cuts to staffing, materials and programming in 2010, according to a presentation by current Superintendent Dr. Pat Aubin and finance director Gerry Missal. The School Committee was reviewing two proposals for FY 2010 as part of a longer meeting in which the group addressed a number of issues, including proposals for a new Wellington Elementary school. A best-case scenario in which the town’s schools were level-funded from the current school year, with a projected 3.5% increase in salaries and salary scale steps, and flat spending in other areas. But the Committee also reviewed an “Available Revenue” scenario in which an additional $2.8m in cuts would be necessary, should the town fail to enact a Proposition 2 1/2 override to patch an estimated $5m structural budget deficit.

According to that presentation, cuts would be necessary across the board in that scenario, with the bulk of savings coming from reductions in “regular instruction” salaries. Translation: firing teachers. The School Committee estimated that as much as $1.3m could be saved through attrition and layoffs of instructional staff and other certified positions. While numbers aren’t firm, Dr. Aubin said that around 20 instructional positions would need to be eliminated to reach the $1.3m number.

Another $222,000 in savings would come from cuts to non-salary instructional funds. That’s money that goes to buy school supplies, textbooks and equipment. Around $519,000 in savings could be had by reducing student and instructional services salaries (again: more lay offs). This means eliminating many athletic and student activity stipends and staff associated with them, which would have the effect of ending some extracurricular programs entirely. Around $420,000 would come from cuts to Student and Instructional non-salary accounts. That includes non-salary athletic accounts and transportation as well as spending on supplies. Mr. Missal and others anticipated that bus fees and athletic fees would have to increase significantly, which might reduce student involvement in those programs or push more students to request reduced fees or waivers from the town, blunting the savings from those cuts.

The rest of the savings come from smaller reductions to a wide range of programs and services: janitorial staff and cleaning supplies, printing and office supplies for administrative staff, and so on. The effect of these small cuts would still be felt deeply.

School Committee members agreed that the School Department would need to find savings, even if the town votes to pass a Proposition 2 1/2 override to patch up the hole in the town’s finances. Committee member Anne Rittenburg said the fiscal situation facing the town was dire and suggested returning to proposals for savings that were suggested in 2006, including regionalization of education and town services, increased fees and new sources of revenue. The town was able to realize cost savings on healthcare as a result of that effort but most other proposals weren’t taken up because the savings weren’t considered substantial enough to be worth the effort, she said. However, the dire fiscal reality facing the town makes even small savings worth trying, she said. Among other things, the town may want to consider a development office for the schools that’s responsible for raising private money to fund some school services. “We’re going to need to rethink the definition of what a public education is,” Rittenburg said.

The School Committee will present its proposal to the Warrant Committee’s Education Subcommittee Wednesday evening at 6:30pm at the Chenery.