Posted by Bob on March 31, 2010 under Daily Blogs | 
Last night’s (3/30/2010) Board of Education meeting involved significant action to reduce expected costs for the 2010-2011 school year. Prior to last night’s meeting, expected costs for July 1, 2010, amounted to a THREE MILLION NINE HUNDRED SEVENTY SIX THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED NINETY SEVEN and 00/100THS ($3,976,997.00) DOLLAR increase over the 2009-2010 budget. This amount already included reductions in personnel related to the early retirement incentive package (”ERIP”) accepted by approximately thirty three (33) teachers.
The following items voted upon last night have resulted in a decrease of that amount to approximately ONE MILLION SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND and 00/100THS ($1,600,000.00) DOLLARS.
Change to Health Insurance Benefit Coordinator
The Board of Education (”BoE”) voted unanimously to change the BoE’s health insurance benefit coordinator from Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield to Cigna. This is expected to provide savings of at least approximately EIGHT HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND and 00/100THS ($850,000.00) DOLLARS for the 2010-2011 fiscal year. The amount currently budgeted for all net health insurance costs was reduced to TEN MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND and 00/100THS ($10,800,000.00) DOLLARS. There is potential for additional savings after it is determined exactly how many employees will be under contract for the coming fiscal year.
Consolidation of Middle Schools and Accompanying Filling of Other Buildings
The BoE unanimously approved the consolidation of Hillside Middle School and City Hill Middle School into City Hill. Hop Brook Intermediate School would move to Hillside, and Prospect Street would move to Hop Brook. Prospect Street would become an early learning center and house the Head Start program currently located at City Hill. This reconfiguration component is projected to provide ONE MILLION ELEVEN THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY EIGHT and 40/100THS ($1,011,188.40) DOLLARS worth of savings. Said amount represents additional savings above the amounts already included in the ERIP savings.
Closing of Salem Elementary School
Regretfully, the BoE voted five (5) to three (3) to close Salem Elementary School. I voted in favor of closing Salem for reasons described below. FOUR HUNDRED TWENTY FOUR THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED SEVENTEEN and 21/100THS ($424,417.21) DOLLARS of savings was projected resulting from the closing. Said amount represents additional savings above the amounts already included in the ERIP savings.
Possible Further Cuts
More severe cuts were discussed but not recommended by the Superintendent. Said possible cuts were discussed in response to requests to show (i) what other possible areas could produce savings; and (ii) what a flat, zero (0) budget may represent for our district.
A class-size projection and list of potential eliminated classes was presented as well. Said documents as well as supporting information for the above actions may be viewed here (all documents are in one .pdf).
None of the decisions taken at last night’s meeting were easy. Given contractual obligations and increases in health benefit and utility costs, the BoE would face an approximate SEVEN MILLION and 00/100THS ($7,000,000.00) DOLLAR increase in costs for 2010-2011 moving forward at existing staffing and building configuration. The goal has been to preserve as many of our outstanding educators and support staff as possible given the financial constraints. While the ERIP and reconfiguration actions was more directed toward reduction of teaching positions, additional cuts are likely from administration and support staff. While Naugatuck is not alone in having to make such decisions, company provides little comfort when one realizes how this impacts people’s lives and the overall effect on our educational system.
The decision to close Salem Elementary School was particularly difficult. Salem has educated generations of Naugatuck students and has earned a special place in the hearts of so many parents, students and former-students alike. Salem’s educators from top to bottom are outstanding and have built an impeccable reputation over many years. Unfortunately keeping Salem open would have forced the BoE to make additional cuts to educators and other staff. Board member David Heller appropriately conveyed a sentiment stated several times throughout this difficult process: “…it’s not the walls in the school that are as important as the people in those walls.” The savings associated with the closure, both in this coming fiscal year and in future years, was too great to justify maintaining Salem at the expense of educators. While it was certainly possible to close Salem next year, this would simply delay the inevitable, cost positions this year, and cause additional disruption associated with reconfiguration for the 2011-2012 school year.
As difficult as it is to close such a magnificent school, it is not the first time a Naugatuck school has closed. Whether it was Center School, Pond Hill School, or Oak Street School to name a few, the Naugatuck educational community has changed throughout our history, persevered and prospered. I promise that the Borough will protect this beautiful building, and find a public use that will honor its splendid architecture and history in our community.
Posted by Bob on March 30, 2010 under Daily Blogs |
The news story just recently broadcast on one of the statewide media outlets contains certain inaccuracies and is misleading regarding the Borough’s response to flooding issues in the Cherry Street area. Reference was apparently made by a resident that the Borough took no action until Channel 8 was called. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
Borough public safety, public works and emergency management officials have been working around the clock to prepare for and address the potential for flooding in known areas of concern throughout Naugatuck. In addition to a emergency response meeting held on Monday (3/29/2010), we have all been in constant contact through cell phone and electronic communications. Storm contact information and weather updates have been included on the Borough’s website, www.naugatuck-ct.gov.
A study of the drainage issues on Cherry Street was recently completed. The results indicated that a minimum cost to implement recommendations was approximately TWO MILLION SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND and 00/100THS ($2,600,000.00) DOLLARS. This recommendation required taking approximately six (6) homes. To remedy the situation without taking property, the price was approximately FOUR MILLION FOUR HUNDRED THOUSAND and 00/100THS ($4,400,000.00) DOLLARS. We are currently investigating funding options and researching the best ways to lessen the impact on the area in the interim.
The problem that was the subject of WTNH report Erin Cox’s story along Charles Street involves run-0ff from Pleasant Avenue that flows through a pipe located on private property that empties into a backyard. The water then pools, again on private property, and overflows through a yard onto Charles Street. I have personally been in the area on multiple occasions, including this morning well, before Channel 8 arrived. Last week, Street Superintendent Bob Roland briefed us on a potential solution that can less the impact. We are currently attempting to negotiate an agreement with a homeowner to gain access necessary to attempt to remedy with would lessen the impact of the water flow during heavy rain.
I am a big supporter of access to information for citizens and news media alike. It might be prudent, however, to have some sort of background on an issue before reporting a story. Our office would be glad to comment on any issue provided we are given the opportunity. In this case, we were not given the courtesy of at least a phone call to comment.
Naugatuck’s public works crews, in addition to our police department and fire department personnel, have done an outstanding job not only responding to concerns throughout the storm, but performing preventative maintenance and monitoring. Crews have been in the Cheery Street area on a constant basis attempting to manage a very difficult situation during a major rainstorm occurring throughout New England.
I am not naive to believe that such coverage has been a part of certain state news organizations for many years. News is a business and everyone wants to be the next “Mike Bogoslowski” to shed light on a wrong needed to be righted. This is a healthy part of our democracy. We do not expect Channel 8 to cover all the good things that happen in Naugatuck if it does not generate ratings. It might be more appropriate, however, to realize that many issues facing municipalities in Connecticut are far more complex than a thirty (30) second spot on the evening news can describe.
Posted by Bob on March 29, 2010 under Daily Blogs |
Today’s (3/29/2010) article in the Waterbury Republican-American references the efforts by certain members of a internet social networking site to conduct a citizens’ performance evaluation of the Board of Education budget. The Citizens Audit Committee (”CAC”), comprised of volunteer members of our community, will access available public information and provide a report on ways to improve efficiency and reduce costs to taxpayers. I wholeheartedly support this effort to streamline operations and increase public participation and transparency in government.
The CAC was suggested by Dr. Armand Fusco, a former superintendent of schools who is currently involved advising groups to perform such processes. I had the pleasure to meet Dr. Fusco who explained in detail his work with various municipalities and their boards of education throughout Connecticut. Any process that provides critical analysis that can improve government operations is welcomed by our administration.
It is concerning, however, when the described leader of the Facebook site states that a ten (10%) percent savings can be achieved through this process and prevent cuts for the 2010-2011 fiscal year. Ten (10%) percent of Naugatuck’s education budget is approximately FIVE MILLION SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND and 00/100THS ($5,600,000.00) DOLLARS.
Any dollars that can be saved by working smarter and reducing waste are beneficial to Naugatuck and its taxpayers. The reality is, however, that the overwhelming portion of any savings associated with the Board of Education budget will come from two (2), related accounts: personnel and health insurance. Without raising taxes, Naugatuck simply can not afford to both employ and insure its valued workers at current levels. Even if, for the sake of argument only, the CAC was able to recommend savings in the millions of dollars before July 1, 2010, it would undoubtedly involve eliminating significant numbers of positions or achieving concessions from various bargaining units. Eliminating frivolous expenditures for school pictures (the invoice for which was not paid) or tax filing errors by the previous business manager should have been done long ago; but will not result in the millions of dollars necessary to close the gap.
The fear that is clearly apparent in our community is that our educational system will suffer as a result of the drastic state of our economy. As a parent of public school children, I share these fears. Providing false hope that all can be resolved by better management only delays facing the inevitable process of making some very difficult choices. The 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 education budget crisis was very much the result of not managing the dollars allocated. Not addressing this situation until after the 2009-2010 school year exacerbated this situation. What we face for the upcoming 2010-2011 school year, however, is very much the same situation facing school districts throughout Connecticut. In addition to the budget problems being described by the media in towns such as Shelton, West Haven, Wallingford, and Bristol; reports of tough times are being reported even in affluent communities such as Darien and Farmington.
A common response from parents in wealthier communities has often been to raise taxes rather than cut educational services. This is not the norm during these uncommon economic times. Families with children are also taxpayers, and many household budgets have been negatively effected by all the economic ills facing our state and nation.
Recommendations from the CAC are encouraged and welcomed, but promoting that savings achieved will result in amounts necessary to avoid making some difficult choices for the upcoming fiscal year is wishful-thinking. Changes to the Board of Education business office will ensure that financial projections will be accurate. The math, however, does not improve and is not complex: significant cuts will need to be made or taxes will need to be raised. Given the state of our economy, most Naugatuck families simply do not have the resources to pay for increased costs.
To meet our goal of a flat education budget, we need to cut approximately FOUR MILLION and 00/100THS ($4,000,000.00) DOLLARS prior to inclusion of any changes to the health insurance line item. This figure has already been reduced the amounts associated from approximately thirty three (33) retirements from outstanding educators with over a thousand (1000) years of collective experience. As a community, we need to have an honest conversation as to how we finalize our budget. That discussion, however, needs to take place with an accurate perspective of the obstacles we face.
Given the problems associated with the past two (2) budgets, it is understandable that anger is focused on the Board of Education. While many are unified in their collective opposition to the Board, the reality of the math does not change. Eventually the discussion will need to focus on what programs will be cut, how class size will be impacted, which buildings will be closed, what concessions can be negotiated and/or how much more individuals are willing to pay. Board leadership needs to do a much better job at articulating these difficult choices, but we all need to recognize the reality that no painless solution exists.
Posted by Bob on March 23, 2010 under Daily Blogs |
The following are updates of budget presentations discussed at Monday’s Finance Board budget workshop. Each budget line item includes the Finance Board’s recommendation for the 2010-2011 fiscal year.
Audit Budget as of 3/23/2010;
Contingency Budget as of 3/23/2010;
Debt Service as of 3/23/2010;
Insurance Budget as of 3/23/2010;
NOW Elderly Nutrition Budget as of 3/23/2010;
Pension Budget as of 3/23/2010; and
Water Hydrant Budget as of 3/23/2010.
The budget process will continue next Monday, March 29, 2010, with a discussion regarding the capital projects portion of the budget. All budget hearings are open to the public and take place in the Commissioner’s Corner, Fourth (4th) Floor, at Town Hall beginning at 6:30 P.M. The public hearing on the 2010-2011 budget will be held at Naugatuck High School at a date to be determined in the coming month of April.
Posted by Bob on March 13, 2010 under Daily Blogs |
Paul Rotatori was kind enough to present a ten (10) point budget review at last evening’s (3/11/2010) Board of Education meeting. While time and Board of Education chair policy prevents would could have been a lively discussion on the ideas, I would like to address Mr. Rotatori’s discussion topics and hopefully generate dialogue and feedback. The following are my personal responses to Mr. Rotatori’s ten (10) points (included for reference in italics), and do not represent the position of collective Board of Education (hereinafter “BoE”).
1. Self-insured insurance plan with escrow or reserve funds included.
Paul’s point is essentially the current course of action being taken by the BoE. In accordance with recommendations from Borough and BoE consultant Dr. Joseph Fields, the BoE issued formal requests for proposal (”RFP”) for health care providers. Numbers are expected today (3/12/2010). While a self-insured plan is certainly less stable than a fully-insured plan, the Naugatuck BoE is not in a position to go fully-funded at this time because there is not reserve. The “run-out” or incurred but not reported (”IBNR”) claims would make a switch to a fully-funded plan cost-prohibitive in the first (1st) year. The general direction is to build a reserve over a three (3) year period which would put the BoE in a position to go fully-funded at that time. Building a reserve is a necessity in any self-funded plan structure.
2. Retired teachers salaries calculated without school closure.
The current expected gross savings from the teacher early retirement incentive plan is approximately TWO MILLION TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED THIRTY ONE and 06/100THS ($2,250,531.06) DOLLARS. This figure is based on approximately thirty three (33) teachers retiring and hiring no replacements. It is estimated that given the content areas of some of the retirees, the BoE will have to replace at least five (5) to eight (8) of those positions.
3. Reexamine present insurance benefits. Is what we have in place something the Borough can afford? Can we get a better rate? Especially considering the younger age of our teachers with all the retirements.
All insurance benefits are collectively bargained with employee groups. The BoE can change carriers provided the coverage included is equal to or better than existing benefits. The biggest factor effecting the health care numbers, aside from the number of insured, is the premium renewal rate currently offered by Anthem which was thirty five (35%) percent higher than the previous year’s cost. This outrageous premium increase is the driving force behind the BoE’s decision to bid carrier services. The BoE or Borough for that matter, can not afford to employ and ensure our valued employees at the current levels with that type of premium increase (the Borough’s municipal quote was thirty one percent higher than the previous year). While the national debate on health care may seem abstract and far removed from Naugatuck, we are feeling the impact of the issues locally.
4. Examine portable classrooms – can they be eliminated or leases renegotiated or canceled?
The BoE currently utilizes six (6) portable classrooms: two (2) at Prospect; two (2) at Western; and two (2) at Cross Street. All portables are owned – not leased – and generally require less maintenance then permanent classrooms. Many of the portable classrooms were purchased as a result of insufficient capacity at existing schools combined with cyclical spikes in enrollment.
5. Can other Board of Education positions be combined with Town Hall employees handling comparable jobs?
There are certainly functions of municipal and BoE governance that overlap and can be integrated better to improve efficiency. The current combination of the business offices and health benefit consulting services has already created better cohesion. Future opportunities to work together exist in the areas of purchasing, payroll, building/grounds maintenance, human resources and information technology. Future collaboration requires the support of a majority of BoE members as state law grants autonomy to boards of education. I personally support future efforts to the limit duplication of services and provide greater efficiency at less cost.
6. Can present employees of the Board of Education be reconfigured to focus on search for additional new federal or state grant monies that may be available?
Currently all municipal and BoE departments often seek grants independent of each other as the Borough has no official grant writer. In addition to their regular job duties, current Tuttle staff identify, obtain and administer various grants for the BoE. The Joint Boards of Finance and Mayor and Burgesses recently named a subcommittee to investigate options to increase the Borough’s grant writing capacity. A report to the Joint Boards is expected this spring. If the Joint Boards is willing to fund a grant writer position, it is certainly possible to allow a municipal grant writer to assist the BoE.
7. With the new utility regulation laws, can we be entertaining better rates?
The entire Borough, including the BoE, is under an existing electrical supply contract with TransCanada. The current contract provides electricity to the Borough for approximately ten ($0.10) cents or less per kilowatt. This is generally considered a good rate for a municipality.
8. Can we be a leader in Connecticut with some type of program where we use student teaching to fill our gaps.
The BoE currently takes advantage of student teaching opportunities in conjunction with various institutions of higher education. Substituting additional student teachers to perform functions currently provided by existing teachers is subject to collective bargaining. While the idea is interesting and worth further investigation, there may be issues of continuity as many student teachers are only available for finite periods of time while completing their educational requirements.
9. Rather than let 100 non-tenured teachers go with a pink slip, (has) there been any thought of giving the non-tenured teachers 3-5 furlough days per year. Better than an unemployment line…
Furlough days are always subject to collective bargaining. It is unlikely that members of a collective bargaining unit would agree to require a certain class of employees to take furlough days and not others. There is also a scheduling problem if certain classes are not staffed while school is open. A clarification of the notices recently sent to non-tenured teachers is also required. State law requires that non-tenured teachers received a timely notice of non-renewal if said non-tenured teachers’ contracts are not going to be renewed. In theory, this allows non-tenured teachers time to prepare for alternative employment if their respective contract is not renewed for the following school year. The recent notice sent to non-tenured teachers by the BoE satisfied that legal requirement, but does not mean that all teachers will not return. Because the BoE is still determining what level of reduction in force will be required for the 2010-2011 school year, notices were sent to all non-tenured teachers. It is everyone’s hope that reductions in teaching personnel can be kept to a minimum once the final budget is approved.
10. Any pink slip thought to some of the Board of Education office employees. Why any different than the teachers’ pink slips.
Reductions in force will effect all levels of BoE employment. The Director of Special Assessment vacancy has not been filled after the previous individual performing that position took a job with another district. Reductions in additional Tuttle staff for the 2010-2011 fiscal year is most certainly a possibility. As stated above in the response to number nine (9), no “pink slips” were issued; only legally-required notices of non-renewal to certified, non-tenured staff to protect the options available to the BoE in crafting the 2010-2011 budget.
I would like to thank Mr. Rotatori for putting his ideas in writing and presenting them to the BoE at last Thursday’s (3/11/2010) meeting. We have often asked for constructive solutions to accompany constructive criticism, and Mr. Rotatori demonstrated leadership by doing just that. I believe that we must all participate in a continuing, community conversation about education. There is much we can learn from each other. Our educational system will be stronger if we understand how the process works and openly discuss ideas to improve the district. While we face uncertain times and difficult decisions, the needs of our students and our taxpayers demand that we discuss, explain and debate our options in an open manner. While we will never all agree on every course of action, we owe it to our community to exchange information and respectfully converse on the challenges we face and opportunities that exist.
Posted by Bob on March 3, 2010 under Daily Blogs |
The Board of Mayor and Burgesses unanimously approved a Memorandum of Agreement (”MOA”) between the Borough of Naugatuck and the Police Dispatchers union at Tuesday’s (3/2/2010) regular meeting. The MOA extends the existing contract through June 30, 2010.
The significant terms of the MOA include the following:
- Zero (0%) Percent wage increase for the 2009-2010 fiscal year;
- One and one half (1.5%) percent increases as of June 1, 2010; and January 1, 2011;
- One and one half (1.5%) percent increases as of June 1, 2011; and January 1, 2012
- An adjustment to the current employees’ pension which will save the Borough an estimated SIX HUNDRED SIXTY FIVE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED SEVENTY SEVEN and 27/100THS ($665,577.27) DOLLARS of pension expenses for existing employees;
- All new hires to the bargaining unit will enter a defined contribution pension plan. This change to a defined contribution pension plan for new hires is consistent with provisions recently bargained with the clerical and supervisory bargaining units.
A fiscal analysis (names redacted) of the changes to the pension plan can be viewed here.
I would like to thank the members of the Police Dispatchers negotiating team and their union representatives for working together to reach agreement with regard to the MOA. Our dispatchers professional service to the Borough is greatly appreciated.
Posted by Bob on March 2, 2010 under Daily Blogs |
The attached is an update of current progress on the 2010-2011 budget. As of today’s date (3/2/2010), we have THREE HUNDRED FIFTY EIGHT THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED TWENTY TWO and 00/100THS ($358,722.00) DOLLARS to either cut from the budget and/or increase in revenue to achieve our goal of a flat budget for the coming fiscal year. Current recommendations represent an increase in expenditures of 1.38 % over the 2009-2010 budget.
The remaining line items will be reviewed in the coming weeks. A revised schedule of the budget process can be viewed here.
Loading ...