While Select Boards voted last week not to support the school district budget, residents of both towns have suggested ways to keep a level-headed discourse on school funding plans.
“The schools’ budget and the town’s budget are now in competition with one another, more than likely on the Town Meeting floor,” Whitman resident John Galvin said. “[It’s] not going to be a good result – it’s a lose-lose situation no matter how it goes.”
Following the public comments on budget considerations, the committee discussed issues up for consideration by town meetings as part of the revised Regional Agreement, now being addressed by that subcommittee. Consensus votes were taken on the 2/3 vote margin, regular reviews of the agreement every three years, condensing language in some sections (such as lease agreements), capital emergency repairs and transportation. The meeting is available for streaming at the WHCA YouTube channel and is on rebroadcast rotation on the access education channel.
All but the 2/3 vote issue were given the green light of consensus.
The 2/3 vote margin failed to reach consensus with a vote of 4-5-1. Regular three-year reviews were supported unanimously. Emergency repair and lease agreement language changes were supported 9-1. Operating cost methodology (statutory method of calculating the assessment formula) language changes were supported was also unanimously as was transportation policy.
Galvin, who has served on Whitman’s Finance Committee and Budget Subcommittee in the past, suggested to the School Committee on Wednesday, April 5 that he had a “third option” that not only level-services the schools, but also the towns.
Hold-harmless, the result of a “simple subtraction equation” – taking the DESE formula for the foundation budget and calculates what the minimum budget needs to be, then subtracts the required municipal contributions (which keeps in mind property values and resident income levels) to determine what Chapter 70 funding will come to the district. The difference from the previous year’s Chapter 70 figure – if it was less than what the district was awarded – that is the hold-harmless figure.
Galvin said this year’s hold-harmless has the district more than $4 million “in the hole.” Next year his calculations put it at about $650,000.
Galvin proposed that Superintendent of Schools Jeff Szymaniak and Chair Christopher Howard meet with the town administrators and chairs of both Select Boards to ask what the maximum they can give to the schools without having to have layoffs and maintaining level services.
“Ask them what the maximum is and then ask them to give a little bit more,” Galvin said. “In return, the district [could use] one-time money this year only to balance the budget.”
He suggested if the schools were to use $840,000 of one-time money, the school budget could balance while the towns could have level services.
“It’s a one-time fix to get us to next year,” he said, when the possibility exists that “not only do we come out of hold-harmless, but we come out of hold-harmless significantly.”
He said there is risk, but it sounds better to Galvin than having to make layoffs. Whitman Select Board members have said the idea is worth considering and Galvin said he would like to see Hanson’s Select Board consider it.
Galvin only asked that the School Committee include the idea for discussion on the next meeting agenda.
Hanson resident Frank Milisi, who described himself as “one of those crazy people who watches the meetings pretty much every week,” also has some budgetary advice to impart before the Regional Agreement discussion.
“I think the one thing the School Committee really needs to do in the next year— years, hopefully — is really start to get a little [public relations]-focused with the towns,” he said, adding he is a strong supporter of the schools. “Everybody here has the best intentions of the kids at heart, making sure they have the best education they possibly can. If you have a robotics program … new languages you want to bring into the schools I would suggest you advertise those intentions well before the budget season.”
Bringing the ideas to the Select Board in each town by letters outlining the expected costs and asking for their opinions would be a good start, he said.
Jim Hickey, a Perry Avenue resident of Hanson, noting that while he is a member of that town’s Select Board, he was speaking in the public forum as a private citizen, said Hanson’s board has already voted that a 2/3 vote is the best way to get the town’s point across. Whitman voted against a 2/3 vote margin.
“I understand it was my idea, it was the simplest way,” Hickey said. “By voting on everything on a 2/3 vote just to keep it simple, but the main things are the budget and that sort of thing.” He also mentioned that, during the joint Select Board meeting held the day before, Whitman board member Justin Evans had said property values and median income are starting to sway Whitman’s way.
“It’s not that way yet, and we have the statutory [funding formula] and Hanson has accepted it,” he said. “If it happens that at some point, say in the next five or six years, Whitman ends up being the wealthier town, the statutory method is here forever … but with a 6-4 advantage, without a 2/3 majority vote, the year that happens the school committee could take a vote to go back to the alternative method.”
While School Committee members were nearly unanimous in doubting that could happen, members voting on the issue were unable to reach a consensus on that one point.
Once the Regional Agreement discussion began, much of the discussion centered on the issue of that vote margin required to pass agenda items up for action before the committee.
“Our job is to take what we hear here in terms of feedback and support or not support back to the Regional Agreement Committee so we can all come together and figure out how we proceed from there,” Howard said of the task before him and Vice Chair Christopher Scriven.
He suggested the non-binding votes as a way of gauging support for the RAC’s work.
School Committee member Fred Small said if the statutory method is in the agreement it is the only method that can be used without changing the agreement.
A 2/3 vote requirement would have to clarify whether is means two-thirds of the entire committee or just of those present unless state law supersedes it, such as might be the case with school choice, David Forth suggested. He said, while the intent of the 2/3 suggestion is aimed at achieving town balance, Forth has never seen a vote decided purely on a town residence basis. Personalities were likely to hold more sway, he said.
Scriven said he has always viewed Whitman, Hanson and the School Committee itself as three segments of a partnership, but wanted to hear the other members’ concerns before he decided.
“When things get difficult, I think it’s incumbent upon a good partner to think about the other partners, so I ask that we do that,” he said.
Hanson’s Hillary Kniffen said she sees value in settling financial questions by a 2/3 vote, but expressed concern about the ability to get anything else done if all votes require that margin.
“I don’t associate us along town lines,” Dawn Byers agreed, favoring a majority vote. “We are Whitman-Hanson, and it’s one word to me.”
Hanson’s Glen DiGravio agreed.
“When I signed up, or ran, or however I got here – I still don’t understand how I got here,” he quipped. “But I never, ever thought I was here to represent my town. I’m here for the students of Whitman-Hanson and the taxpayers and, if we start voting for our towns, I think we’re doing a disservice to the committee.”
He added he doesn’t feel any committee members do vote along town lines.
Howard argued that the more a clear consensus allowed by a 2/3 vote might be helpful, but noted he is on his way off the committee – and RAC never discussed the issue.
Small noted that most other government at all levels – unless otherwise specified – is run by majority vote.
The RAC also felt the agreement requires regular review, building in a requirement that it be done every three years.
“I think this is an easy one,” School Committee member Beth Stafford said. Small agreed that it “makes a lot of sense,” but questioned whether three or five years – as previously required with no “action item” Howard said.
Forth agreed, but wondered how it might be enforced. Assistant Superintendent George Ferro suggested it be placed on an annual agenda or calendar as soon as it is adopted to make sure it is not forgotten.