66°
SHREWSBURY, Mass. - A public hearing on the Shrewsbury school budget Wednesday was missing a key ingredient: the actual budget figure.
That number, Superintendent of Schools Joseph Sawyer said, will be determined at a later date. In the meantime, residents weighed in on the budget pieces that are known, which includes an anticipated $3 million budget gap due to expected wage, special eucation, operation and transportation increases in Fiscal Year 2013.
The shortfall, Sawyer said, may necessitate the layoff of teachers, a move that concerned several parents.
"We're really concerned about class size at the Sherwood Middle School," said Margot LaFortune Fleonis, who said her family moved to Shrewsbury 14 years ago in part because of the school system's reputation. Increasing class size, she said, would impact student learning and MCAS scores, potentially depressing property values in Shrewsbury.
But John Lukach questioned why the school budget regularly sees annual increases and questioned why federal stimulus funds were used for staffing when it was known at the outset that the funds would not be available after two years.
School Committee Chairman John Samia noted that the federal funds were stretched to last for two years in Shrewsbury while other school systems spent the money in one. He also said the school system had to adhere to federal guidelines on their use.
School choice, which Shrewsbury had allowed in the past year, was also debated during the hearing. Former Selectman Benjamin Tataglia said school choice is unfair to Shrewsbury students who are already in the system.
"If they take a spot on a sports team, that's one less opportunity for a Shrewsbury student," he said.
The budget and school choice will be voted upon by the School Committee in March.
Ms. Paluzzi’s reporting is inaccurate. I did not question ‘… why the school budget regularly sees annual increases’. What I said is that the biggest component in annual budget increases is salary increases; that all teachers not at the top step would be receiving annualized salary increases averaging about 7.4% next year; that the school budget presentation tends to minimize this fact by calling attention only to the 2.75% cost of living component; and that continuing these levels of salary increases is not sustainable, certainly not in the current economy.
I also did not question ‘… why federal stimulus funds were used for staffing’. I knew perfectly well that this was required. What I said is that the school department knew for at least two years that the federal stimulus funds were temporary, so it should have planned better in order to avoid the impact of this $1.2 Million loss hitting the budget in one year.
What surprises me most about this article is that it does not mention my statement that annualized salaries increased in several teacher categories over the last nine years by an average of about 7% per year, despite the poor economy and despite claims of salary freezes/cutbacks in recent years. (I would be happy to provide the reporter with my analysis and my source documents from the school department.) Of course school officials don’t want to talk about this, but I believe that readers of thedailyshrewsbury would be very interested in this information.
John Lukach