Latest SAD 4 budget proposal is not a compromise

To the Editor;

Last night (Aug. 18) the SAD 4 School Committee passed its third proposed budget for the coming year. The Committee adopted a budget that increases (from the second budget proposal that failed) the amount of money wanted from the taxpayers. The new assessment increases from last year are: Abbot 7.1 percent; Cambridge 8.39 percent; Guilford 9.17 percent; Parkman 12.26 percent; Sangerville 7.97 percent; and Wellington 11.52 percent.

While you need to be clear that your taxes will not be increased by the above percentages, your taxes will increase because of the proposed school budget. Even though most of the towns have received their tax bills, some of which showed a decrease, the school portion caused an increase, thus blunting to some degree the actual amount you might have gained had the school budget increases been lower.

The increases proposed are caused by a more accurate (we hope) reworking of a new budget billed by the school administration as a “compromise.” The committee by a much divided vote created two new half-time administrative positions; a vice principal for the high school and an activities director (including an athletic director) for the district. While some committee members denied that these positions will be undoubtedly filled by two former physical education teachers, half of whose positions were wiped out due to the lower number of students needing service, the likelihood that these administrative positions will be filled by someone else is close to nil.

Sad though it may be, a system cannot keep individuals in positions for which there is no work; and making new positions tailor-made for them is not the reasonable educational or financial answer. Bottom line, this move has cut one half of the Director of Evaluation and Curriculum administrative position and has created two new half-time administration positions.

As a compromise, this response to the public wish for less administration doesn’t add up. Money was also anteed up for a half-time return of an alternative ed position for four identified students with an undocumented number waiting in the wings. No effort was made to address a full science position that would serve all the students in meetings their credit requirements for high school.

There is no way to rationalize these changes based on student need. Further it was announced the reduction of the Director of Evaluation’s position will not yield over $40K in savings as earlier reported because of an untimely delivered notice of the change to the employee. The savings this year will be at best around $19K. Quite a substantial oops!

This “compromise” shows decided favoritism to a limited few individuals, treads a fine line in ethicality, raises the educational taxes portion of each taxpayer’s contribution, and demonstrates a divided board that could neither substantially support (rightly) nor understand the machinations of the administration in both its budgeting process and in its budget figures.

Further there is no real public information forthcoming on the existence of fund balance. The chief financial officer ducks all questions, guarding the amount as if it were the Holy Grail. The board is entitled to a clear explanation of actual figures and the refusal to provide it is a misplaced attitude on the part of the employee. She is keeping the books for the public and they are entitled to full and current disclosure.

I encourage the public to attend and be heard at the upcoming district budget meeting on Monday, August 29, at 6 p.m. and to follow up with a vote at the local polls on Monday, September 8, 2016. This third, latest permutation of the SAD 4 budget does not pass the straight face test and deserves to be voted down. To say that this budget proposal is compromised is more accurate than promoting it as an acceptable compromise!

Ann Bridge
Parkman