School Board Passes $82.65 Million Budget Request

The 3.82 percent increase includes $1.88 million in new spending and covers a $1.16 million deficit left by federal jobs grant funding.

After a slight reduction realized in a $50,000 transportation savings, the Board of Education passed an $82.65 million budget request for the 2012-13 school year.

Board members unanimously passed the budget after just a small discussion Thursday evening at the . The budget request represents a $3.04 million, or 3.82 percent, increase over the approved budget for the current fiscal year and includes just $1.88 million in new spending after factoring in a federal jobs grant used to supplement this year’s budget.

The budget proposal includes a proposed reduction of 22 staffing positions including 15 teachers, although the location of those position cuts remains undecided at this point. Board of Education Chairman Brian Goralski said it was a tough decision to make, but one the board had to consider.

“Reducing 22 staff positions makes me incredibly uncomfortable, especially with the number of teachers. Right now we only have eight retirements and so as of this moment, it will put eight people out of work,” Goralski said. “It’s tough to think we will be contributing to this bad economy.”

School Superintendent Joseph V. Erardi Jr. initially presented a budget proposal that , including $1.93 million in new spending. Most of this spending was due to contractual increases, he said Thursday, and a review of transportation costs allowed for a reduction of $50,000.

While the request surpasses a 3 percent increase, $1.16 million is attributed to a federal jobs grant drying up and it left the board in a tough position before the process even got underway, according to board member Jill Notar-Francesco.

The Board of Finance and Town Council voted to reduce the budget in 2011, favoring instead using a $1.16 million grant to balance the request. That left a 1.49 percent hole for the Board of Education entering this budget cycle, Notar Francesco said.

“I’m still very concerned about cutting teaching positions at the elementary school level, but am encouraged that with flexibility, we could figure out how not to cut so much,” she said.

One of the challenges facing the board has been the unknown of Education Cost Sharing funding at the state level, first-year board member Zaya Oshana said. Due to reductions in funding during past years, the board planned for a 72 percent award from the state.

Oshana said he’s concerned that if the state does not follow through on their end, it will lead to additional challenges and is not confident that Southington will receive even 72 percent.

“The process is just ineffective,” Oshana said. “At 72 percent, we are already getting $683,035 less than we should be receiving. If there is any way to push harder for that, it’s something we need to do. Something has to be done with those mandates – we are running blind.”

The Board of Education request will now be forwarded to the Board of Finance, who will begin discussing the budget when they start their process in February.

Board of Finance members Edward Pocock II and Sandra Feld, who attended the Thursday’s meeting, said there will be a difficult challenge ahead as they look to balance the needs of the taxpayer with the needs of the school district.

“There is still a lot of work to be done,” Feld said. “Nobody wants to see teachers eliminated and any discussion by the Board of Finance will talk about how important we feel education is. We’ve done a lot of research already, but we have a lot still to do.”

G Wilson January 27, 2012 at 11:37 AM
"The Board of Finance and Town Council voted to reduce the budget in 2011, favoring instead using a $1.16 million grant to balance the request." I think the Town should be looking, in fact should have been looking, at reduced federal and state grants and their budget impact years ago. Private industry has to do this all the time. You look at your key revenue sources and if they appear to be having trouble you cover your bases. Nobody did that on the Board of Education while the rest of us were feeling it since 2008. Non-profits were guilty of this, too, judging by the money pleas I got the end of this year. If we're "paying" for all this senior administrative talent, they ought to have a little more foresight that to run educators into the wall. When the Board has to increase the budget by more than inflation and yet lay-off 22 staff, 15 educators, something doesn't smell right!
gary January 27, 2012 at 02:24 PM
I simply cannot fathom how the BOE could contemplate losing 15 educators. There are so many layers of "fluff" that can be sorted out and eliminated before you get to the point that you loose the people and the talent that is most important.
WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot January 27, 2012 at 04:10 PM
The town has money to buy open space which most of us have no use for. But we don't have money for teachers? I think the money would be better spent on teachers than a over grown field. Or did they buy this open space so the town council and the BOE can bury their heads in it?
J Smith January 28, 2012 at 11:58 AM
Whiskey, I hear you but let's not sacrifice programs beneficial to the community in general to foster one organization that can't get their fiscal priorities right. If they go with your suggestion, they would spend the entire general fund on education --- mostly sports. I think the Town needs to draw a heavier line in the sand and just say, "NO!"


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »