Salem School Closing – 4/5/2010

Posted by Bob on April 5, 2010 under Daily Blogs | Read the First Comment

Reconfiguration plans are often unpopular with parents who are affected by changes.  Closing a   school, particularly a school with the tradition of Salem Elementary School, is a decision no one enjoys making.  Unfortunately we are left with too many expenses and not enough dollars to pay for them.  Communities throughout Connecticut and across the United States are being forced to make tough decisions.  Workforces are being reduced, programs are being eliminated, and unfortunately, schools are being closed.

Believing that there exists a magic solution to prevent cuts and reconfiguration is fantasy.  The alternative to this is raising taxes.  I have heard little support for increasing costs to taxpayers during these trying economic times.  The FOUR HUNDRED TWENTY FOUR THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED SEVENTEEN and 41/100THS ($424,417.41) DOLLARS worth of savings associated with the closing of Salem, which will increase in future years, saves the jobs of educators and support staff that would otherwise have to be cut.  The dollar figure referenced was provided by the Board of Education’s business office and curriculum office.

Some people are rightfully upset with the decision.  In a perfect world, districts like Naugatuck could maintain relatively small neighborhood schools disproportionate to surrounding communities.  Class-size would never increase and cuts would not need to be made.  Unfortunately this is not the reality in which we live.  Given the fact that some would use this sad decision for political purposes, it is important that facts are separated from fiction.

No other alternatives were considered.

That is not true.  The original intent of the JCJ Architecture facilities study was to analyze existing space and building equity and propose ways to better utilize space.  The study commended all of Naugatuck’s schools for parental involvement and relative satisfaction.  This came as no surprise as we have outstanding parents who are actively involved with our schools.

The study also happened to coincide with back-to-back years of financial problems experienced by the Board of Education (“BoE”).  While reconfiguration was always an option, it received more focus when it became apparent just how much money would be needed by the BoE to meet expected costs for the 2010-2011 fiscal year.  JCJ was involved with the BoE Facilities Committee throughout Winter and discussed some of the inherent issues confronting the operation of Salem School.  The closing of other schools was considered, as was changing grade configurations.  Dollars and student populations were analyzed for weeks by Business Manager Wayne McAllister and Director of Curriculum and Instruction Brigitte Crispino.  Numerous options were considered by the Facilities Committee.  While reasonable minds can differ about the ultimate result, decisions were not made without significant analysis; and, in most cases, much angst.

The need to cut expenses for 2010-2011 was the fault of Board of Education mismanagement.

False.  The 2008-2009 deficit and the 2009-2010 operating shortfall were, in my opinion, the result of serious deficiencies in the BoE business office and poor decisions with regard to health insurance.  The upcoming 2010-2011 budget is different and can best be described this way:  For the BoE to provide the exact same level of service on July 1,2010 (the first day of the next fiscal year) as it did on the June 30, 2010 (the last day of the current fiscal year), costs would increase approximately SEVEN MILLION and 00/100THS ($7,000,000.00) DOLLARS.  Yes, $7 million!  The reasons for this drastic increase is attributable to only a couple, general line items:  contractual increases for personnel and increases in health insurance.  Certainly there are other areas that will require an increase, but how many personnel work for the district and to what level they are insured are the driving costs behind education in most communities, including Naugatuck.

If the BoE had proper information preparing for the 2009-2010 school year, it is likely that such drastic decisions would have to have been made last year.  As it was, the 2009-2010 budget was resolved primarily through a combination of employee concessions, freezing all discretionary items, and an assumption of the operating deficit by the Borough.  Had the decisions been made at the proper time for the 2009-2010 fiscal year, it is likely that school reconfiguration would have been discussed and occurred last year.

The alternative is for the Joint Boards of Finance and Mayor and Burgesses to allocate more money to the Board of Education.  Since our grand list (or taxable, local property) increased by .3 percent (0.3%), and state funding has remained relatively flat, the only way of increasing funding would be to increase local property taxes.  Again, I have heard very few individuals advocating for a tax increase.

Salem School has a deed restriction limiting it for education purposes only.

True, as do numerous properties throughout the State of Connecticut.  It was common for wealthy philanthropists to make land grants to municipalities in the nineteenth (19th) century and restrict future use for educational, municipal and/or recreational purposes.  It is quite common in Connecticut that the buildings built on such restricted land outlive there functionality.  Connecticut law, operating under the “Cy Pres” doctrine, has allowed municipalities to alter the restrictions to a certain degree.

Cy Pres is a French word meaning “as close as possible”  (See http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/cy-pres-doctrine/).  The legal theory, as applied in Connecticut to deed-restricted properties, seeks to protect the use of of a property to the closest degree possible given the changing of times.  The Connecticut Attorney General’s office is charged with protecting the public trust, and is a party to any town’s request to alter such a restriction.  For example, a property with an educational deed restriction is likely to be allowed to be used for another municipal use.  This happens quite often in Connecticut.  An applicant would have a more difficult time using a deed-restricted property for commercial purposes.

Salem School will go to waste and become and eyesore in Downtown Naugatuck.

False.  It makes no sense why the Borough, which owns all the school buildings, would allow Salem to deteriorate.  Whether a school or not, Salem is a Borough asset that will be protected.  Based on its location and architectural structure, Salem is more likely to house an alternative use than most other Borough schools.  Salem is not an old factory building or gas station/convenient store; it is a building of historical significance that will still be an important part of our community.

Salem will be the new Town Hall.

Not likely, at least in the short-term.  While Salem certainly resembles some of the picturesque town halls located in other towns, it is unlikely that it could replace our existing town hall without significant upgrades.  Town Hall contains six (6) vaults that require significant load-bearing capacity that Salem does not have.  In addition, electrical and heating/venting/air-conditioning (“HVAC”) deficiencies as well as Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) compliance issues present certain obstacles.  That is not to say, however, that Salem can not provide additional or “annex” space for various Borough departments, including the Board of Education if necessary.  With proper funding in future years, Salem could serve as a classic New England town hall.  Certain grant opportunities are available for buildings not used as schools, particularly with regard to ADA improvements.

The Reconfiguration Plan is subject to legal challenge.

True.  Our legal system provides broad access to everyone, and initiating an action is not difficult.  The real questions are on what basis will a challenge be made, what is the likelihood of success and what are the ultimate goals.  The recent success of the Region 14 (Nonnewaug) reconfiguration challenge had a very different fact pattern and involved a regional district (a member of which apparently did not approve of the plan).  The deed restriction issue is another possibility, but, as discussed above, their is a well-established procedure for addressing this common issue in Connecticut.

Even if, for the sake of discussion only, a legal challenge was successful, we as a community need to address what the goals would be.  Any successful challenge, beyond an initial injunction, will be a lengthy process occurring over months if not years.  In the end, Naugatuck would still face an approximate FOUR HUNDRED TWENTY FOUR THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED SEVENTEEN and 41/100THS ($424,417.41) DOLLAR budget shortfall for the 2010-2011 school year which would mean that we would likely have to choose from another sets of difficult choices: (i) close another school; (ii) cut educators and support staff; (iii) higher taxes; and/or (iv) a combination of the above.

There is another consideration:  the lesson we teach our children in the process.  Many individuals across our nation are feeling the impact of unprecedented economic turmoil.  Some are losing their homes, their jobs and/or their life savings.  Some are handling these life-changing events better than others.  I do not seek to diminish the sadness of having to close a school or relocate student populations to other schools; but it is important to put this in perspective.  If accommodating a new school environment is the worst challenge our children will face in their lives, we should consider them quite lucky.  Our children will react to how we handle unfortunate changes to our Borough.

Conclusion

I realize that closing Salem School is not popular with many.  The choices I make are done in what I believe to be the best interests of Naugatuck.  I will not avoid my decisions, and welcome the opportunity to discuss them with anyone, even if we do not agree.