Business Manager John Stanbrook has pledged to continue providing a monthly budget report and will give a quarterly analysis of the school budget, including transfers of Circuit Breaker finances to the School Committee as the panel concluded a lengthy meeting, Wednesday, Jan. 5, on the questions and concerns that have cropped up over use of Circuit Breaker funds.
Superintendent of Schools Jeffrey Szymaniak, who acknowledged Stanbrook’s important work in uncovering budget concerns, also pledged greater transparency in the budgeting process to the committee.
“I don’t think we did things right,” Szymaniak said. “I don’t think I did things right with these [School Committee] folks, I don’t think Dr. [Ruth Gilbert-]Whitner did things right … I don’t know if Dr. [John F.] McEwan did or not, I didn’t know Dr. McEwan. But I think we can do better, I think we need to do better. Communication with both communities has to be better.”
School Committee members Mike Jones, Fred Small and Michelle Bourgelas attended the meeting remotely by phone.
“Of late, there are a number of questions and concerns that have come up concerning Circuit Breaker as was first discussed in our November meeting and the administration has been working to gather information needed,” said Committee Chairman Christopher Howard. “That process has been delayed a couple of times due just from folks being out, which we’re continually dealing with.” He said the plan for the meeting was to lay out all the questions put forth up to this point and share the answers publicly. Follow-up questions were permitted as the presentation progressed.
The complete meeting may be viewed on the WHCA-TV YouTube channel online, or as rebroadcast on the education channel.
Howard said he and Vice Chairman Christopher Scriven met with school district administrators in an effort to obtain information on “questions that we thought needed to be addressed.”
“A lot of this material is a little dense – it’s a little thick – it can be complex at times, so really the objective of tonight’s meeting is to try and get to the same place of understanding,” Howard said.
Questions and answers [also available on the WHRSD website at the link: https://p10cdn4static.sharpschool.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server_18535382/File/WHRSD%20Circuit%20Breaker%20Questions_final.pdf] included what is Circuit Breaker?
“Circuit Breaker is the state’s special education reimbursement program,” the response stated, in part among the nine pages of questions and answers. “Its intent is to provide relief to districts for high-cost special education students, and not all placements go where parents would necessarily prefer because of the process schools must follow.”
Szymaniak explained there are some students for whose educational costs are not reimbursed, because their tuition did not meet that standard.
Szymaniak said that Stanbrook had mentioned in a budget subcommittee meeting that there was a change in how the Circuit Breaker funds would be used in the fiscal 2023 budget. In addition to Stanbrook, retired interim Business Manager John Tuffy also attended the meeting.
“From that, more questions evolved about how we had done in the past, what we were going to do in the future, what past practices we’ve used that I’ve learned, now, probably aren’t best past practices, and how we figure out how we do this moving forward to make sure this committee here has a full understanding of this revenue source here, this reimbursement source of Circuit Breaker,” Szymaniak said, inviting more questions. “I’m just trying to be open and honest that I might not have a specific answer. I’m not trying to brush it off.”
Answers not available at the time would be answered at a subsequent meeting, or by a phone call or email, he said.
“I think [Stanbrook], in this role, is extremely efficient and is continually finding some things of how we can improve as a district, how his office can improve and how we can improve communications with the School Committee and the towns, so that we don’t have this problem in the future,” Szymaniak said.
Disagreements
He acknowledged there are disagreements out in the communities about best practices and how to use Circuit Breaker funds.
“What I found from my colleagues, from MASC, from DESE, there is no Golden Rule,” he said, pledging to more effectively communicate options. “People do it differently.”
Reviewing the basic reimbursement formula timing for some residential facility needs cases, was clarified by Whitman resident Shawn Kain, administrator of the Recovery High School in Brockton, whose wife is also a special education teacher, as he had been.
“We’re going to be reimbursed for the money we pay for that student next year,” Kain said. “So the Circuit Breaker we get for that student will increase next year … even though the special ed costs [for the year of the expense] will increase. … I think that’s an important clarification … sometime special education costs and Circuit Breaker reimbursement gets blurred.”
Tuffy agreed it is a reimbursement program.
Small asked how many times in the past five years the district had experienced an emergency expense – such as a special needs student moving into the district or requiring residential placement.
“I think that’s a flow,” Szymaniak said. “I can’t give you an exact number.”
Student Services Director Lauren Matthiesen described her budget process for some costs as a best-guess process based on expecting 3 percent increases from collaborative schools and 6 percent increases from private placements each year during budget calculations. Some figures are not finalized until June.
Tuffy said the district had actually received funds this year as a beginning reimbursement for special education transportation.
“Up until now, we’ve never gotten any money at all,” he said. “They’re phasing it in over a period of time. They actually missed the first year that they said they were going to phase it in because of financial issues at the state [level]. The assumption is we will continue to see that funded as we go into fiscal year 2023.”
Whitman Selectman Randy LaMattina said he could already see the meeting going off the rails before the discussion had reached the half-hour point.
“We’re now talking about special education costs, not Circuit Breaker reimbursement,” he said, asking why the two were being confused.
Like Howard, LaMattina questioned where the district’s best practices come from.
“I’m asking the same question,” Howard said. “What my opinion of that is, it’s an opinion and I would ask everyone to hold their ‘we’re going to accept those as what we should do’ until we actually go through all the information because its simply an opinion of best practices from someone.”
LaMattina also asked if the district places Circuit Breaker reimbursements in an account such as special education stabilization, rather than funneling money into the general fund. Stanbrook said that, yes, there is a Special Revenue Fund for Circuit Breaker in the budget.
“All the revenue from Circuit Breaker goes into that account, no question,” he said.
Stanbrook also reviewed special education expenses from fiscal 2014 to 2021. Overall special ed costs went from about $7.7 million in 2014 to $11.2 million in fiscal 2021 – a 44.95 percent increase, based on end-of-year reports required by DESE.
In the past, it’s been used for tuition to collaboratives, professional salaries, contractual services and transfers to the general fund, Stanbrook said.
School Committee member Hillary Kniffen asked if there was a best practices recommendation for how much Circuit Breaker funding the district should use in a year.
Szymaniak said that percentage amount has not been found, but the committee had recommended that a policy be determined. Howard confirmed that his inquiries to state officials show “it’s all over the place.”
What is not spent is carried over into excess and deficiency per state law, Szymaniak said.
Whitman resident John Galvin, who stressed he was not speaking in his capacity as a Finance Committee member, had several questions about a chart showing the “drastic overspending” of Circuit Breaker money in 2018 and ’19 as well as “drastic under-allocation” of it in 2021 and ’22. He questioned who authorized the overspending in 2018 and ’19 when the report he cited “clearly showed it was not transferred to the general fund” and how it was actually paid out. He also questioned a page on the late deposit of $246,943 on July 2, 2019 — after the budget had been certified. He said he was aware the figure was explained (the last deposit on fiscal 2018 had been delayed) on another chart, but a notation would have helped transparency.
“Telling the truth can’t possibly be misleading,” said Stanbrook, who said his report was based purely on what is in the accounting system. Galvin said it would simply be helpful to add notations on the chart if an additional amount was delayed. He also questioned how it was spent, if it was not transferred to the general fund.
Heated exchange
Howard cut off the back and forth discussion to focus on the original question of who authorized expenditures.
“It’s an honest answer – I don’t have an answer for you right now,” Szymaniak said of the 2019 budget compiled before he was superintendent.
“You should have been made aware that that money was being added to the overall budget after it was certified,” LaMattina said, noting that if more money is going to be added to the general fund in any given year after the budget has been certified, the School Committee needs to vote on it.
“We’re not getting at spending,” he said. “You should have been made aware that money was being added to the overall budget after it was certified (for fiscal 2021). … I think we’re here to discuss a mistake that I think we’re dancing around. A mistake was obviously made in the way this was calculated — an accounting mistake and then spending.”
If used correctly, Circuit Breaker reimburses the school district to offset unexpected costs and then the bill comes to the town, which frees up more money for member towns.
“That’s not the way this has been done, and that’s the way it was supposed to be done,” LaMattina said.
Stanbrook said the state asks his office twice to certify that the required amount had been transferred out of the Circuit Breaker fund so the district would not carry more than one year’s worth as per state regulation.
Szymaniak said the fiscal 2021 budget, with all it’s unknown COVID-related expenses led to the district being conservative with Circuit Breaker, but still ended up with “an abundance at the end of the year.”
“It was a very difficult time to understand how we were going to budget, even to the point when we developed our remote plan for students, we didn’t know if we were going to be reimbursed for that at all,” he said. Fiscal 2022 carried it’s own COVID-related questions, including learning loss and social-emotional issues. More parents of special ed students were also looking for residential placement for their children, as well.
Stanbrook recently proposed to the budget subcommittee that the district determine the total sped costs in the general fund for fiscal 2023, and then remove about $1.7 million from that budget and show it as being paid by the Circuit Breaker in the special revenue section of a budget
“It covers the amount we need to spend next year by the state regulation, and I think it will show a substantial relief to the towns,” Galvin said in support of the proposal.
Kniffen said she is more concerned with the educational opportunities for students that Circuit Breaker savings could be used to finance. LaMattina argued that proper use of Circuit Breaker would enable the towns to possibly give more if voted because you’re allocating the reimbursement in a proper manner. Both he and Galvin fully supported Stanbrook’s proposal.
“You don’t get less money,” he said. “You’re now presenting a more accurate budget to the towns. By not doing it right, you’re hurting yourself.”
Kain also said he believes last year’s budget was miscalculated in an effort to hold back some money for a rainy day fund of sorts. Scriven was uncertain about Kain’s terminology, but said it was clear state Circuit Breaker regulations were not followed.
“That, to me, is the problem,” he said.
“I just think people agreed on the budget last year under false assumptions,” Kain said. “If you wanted to withhold some money for a special ed rainy day fund, it should have been in the budget and subtracted in that line. It wasn’t, and it was voted on, therefore to me, that doesn’t sit right.”
Howard said he did not disagree with anything Kain said.
“We could have been more transparent,” Howard said, but neither he nor Scriven knew where to go with that.
“What we can do best is learn from the experience,” Small said, suggesting a special ed stabilization fund be established and funded.
Whitman Finance Committee liaison to the School Department Kathleen Ottina thanked the School Committee for putting together the session.
“It’s a refreshing approach to informing the public how money is spent,” she said. “The school budget is not a simple budget. … I believe we have the right people committed to the School Committee and to the towns, going forward, who will do the right thing.”