Although the school committee adopted (by a vote of 13-1) a budget for the towns to consider during annual town meetings, there are still many unknowns in this area. At the top of these unknowns is the final impact Worthington’s potential withdrawal will have on the district’s finances. While we can determine an approximation of the net cost of Worthington withdrawing from the district, the legal costs of opposing the withdrawal, the unknowns of whether the district and remaining towns will prevail in court, and the as yet unfulfilled promise of mitigation money from the state all have great potential to change the budget dynamics within the district and our towns.
The budget adopted by the school committee will likely make most parents happy, as it supports the initial ‘educational plan’ submitted to the DESE (Department of Elementary and Secondary Education) as required by the legislation allowing Worthington to withdraw from the district. This plan calls for only minor changes in district structure and does not require changing the structure of any of the schools, does not call for major reductions in staffing, and does not change the services offered to our students. While this ‘no change’ budget, which essentially is close to a level-service budget, effects little change in the district, its affordability rests heavily upon receiving $630,000 in mitigation funding from the state. Without such funding, the cost of maintaining the current system to the towns is an increase in assessments of over one million dollars.
Many of us have attended meetings since before the legislation passed, and right up until the present, where we’ve been promised that the state will provide funding to help with the transition from a 7-town to a 6-town district. I have little doubt that our legislators will put forward a request for such funding but am concerned whether this will be done in such a way that ensures that the Governor cannot cut such additional funds, as happened this year with 9C cuts to regional transportation reimbursement. The school committee has already voted, as part of adopting the budget, that all mitigation funds received by the district will be used to decrease town assessments. Thus it will be imperative as we discuss budgets, the withdrawal, and educational opportunities with our legislators that we compellingly make them aware that such funding is critical for the district to move forward with a high quality education and that such funding must be guaranteed to remain despite any 9C cuts Governor Baker may make to adjust the budget during the coming fiscal year.
As we finalize the budget documents (the line item budget can presently be viewed online) we will also provide information on several aspects of the budget and what individuals, town officials, and organizations can do to help ensure the district gets an operating budget that meets both student needs and town financial constraints.
While this is an unusual year in terms of unknowns, the truth is that every year we face the reality that we won’t know what state aid to education (or the towns) will be until the state budget process is complete (the Governor’s budget, the House budget, the Senate budget, the final ‘compromise’ budget and the Governor’s signature), which usually occurs long after all of our annual town meetings have concluded. I believe the school committee took the appropriate steps within the legal time frame to provide an adopted budget for the towns to consider and in doing so met their initial obligations in this process. We should recognize that this was a difficult choice that they made in support of our children’s education.
