By Michael P. Norton, State House News Service

BOSTON The Massachusetts Legislature was the last in the nation to enact an annual budget this year and now their drawn-out deliberations over last year’s state budget are about to cost the taxpayers real money.

Comptroller Andrew Maylor faces a Thursday deadline to file the state’s annual Statutory Basis Financial Report closing the books on spending and revenues for the fiscal year that ended June 30, almost four months ago. But here’s the problem: the Legislature still isn’t done spending last year’s revenues.

Beacon Hill talks on a final fiscal 2019 supplemental budget only started to heat up this month, and House and Senate Democrats are currently looking at two different bills that spend most of last year’s budget surplus, while proposing rainy day savings account deposits of between $350 million and $400 million.

In a letter delivered to top lawmakers and Gov. Charlie Baker Tuesday, Maylor said that when the budget bill is eventually signed by Gov. Charlie Baker, it will take about 14 days to compile the final financial report and have it reviewed by the state’s independent audit firm, currently KPMG. That timeline puts Maylor’s office well beyond its statutory filing deadline.

“Please note that this is a target to help you understand when the SBFR might be issued but is not a guarantee,” Maylor wrote.

As part of his work, Maylor is required to certify and report the state’s consolidated net surplus at the same time as he issues the financial report, and the surplus certification determines if the budget is balanced and if there’s any amount to be transferred to the rainy day account.

Basing his calculations on the financial report being issued on Nov. 15, Maylor projected forgone interest on expected stabilization fund revenues of more than $500,000, an amount he estimated will increase by more than $30,000 each day beyond Nov. 15.

Calling it a “measurable downstream impact” of not filing the financial report on time, Maylor wrote, “I realize that this amount may not seem important, but as a taxpayer and someone who spent more than 25 years in local government, that sum is meaningful.”

The spending bills are on the minds of legislators, and the many stakeholders throughout Massachusetts who stand to benefit from newly authorized spending. The House closeout budget totaled about $723 millin in spending; the Senate bill authorized $780 million in spending.

“On Beacon Hill, a supplemental budget should be coming out, we think this week,” Education Commissioner Jeff Riley told the Board of Education Tuesday.

Riley added, “We think legally they have to figure this out by Oct. 31, but that may be pushed. Legally is perhaps too strong a word. Maybe they’re shooting for Oct. 31, traditionally.”

Last year, Treasurer Deb Goldberg and former Comptroller Thomas Shack knocked the practice of passing final supplemental budgets so long after fiscal years had ended, with Goldberg comparing the practice to “kids getting away with stuff for too long.”

To follow industry best practices, Shack said, a final supplemental budget should be approved by Aug. 31 each year.

“This is the fourth fiscal year that I’ve operated as the commonwealth’s comptroller and this is the fourth year under my comptrollership that we will not meet the statutory deadline,” Shack said last October.”I would reiterate that such late activity is really perilous. It’s a well-known risk within the audit world that if you do not meet your own statutory obligations you may well subject yourself to really, really significant scrutiny.”

Senate President Pro Tempore William Browsberger said lawmakers are aware of Thursday’s deadline and said there’s a possibility that the budget bills could be reconciled without the need for a six-member conference committee.

Katie Lannan contributed reporting

Please pass this message on to the Board:

Recently I contacted Mr. Szocik on the deteriorating road condition on the lower end of Brooks Village Road. First of all I want to say that Mr. Szocik was a pleasure to speak with and not only did I find him very professional but also very friendly and kind.

Secondly, Mr. Szocik addressed the situation and initially did some repairs...and returned once again to do some more repairs on the berm.

I just want to say that I appreciate Mr. Szocik's efforts and kindness in getting the job done well.

Sincerely,

Joseph Kondrchek
Ridgewood Lane

---

From: dlssupport@dor.state.ma.us <dlssupport@dor.state.ma.us>
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2019 11:03 AM
To: accountant@phillipston-ma.gov <accountant@phillipston-ma.gov>; Pontbriand, Kelli <kpontbriand@TempletonMA.gov>; Currie, Michael <mcurrie@TempletonMA.gov>; Griffis, Terry <tgriffis@TempletonMA.gov>; Bennett, Jeff <jbennett@TempletonMA.gov>; Richard, Julie <jrichard@TempletonMA.gov>; selectman@phillipston-ma.gov <selectman@phillipston-ma.gov>; Diane Haleybrooks <DHaleybrooks@TempletonMA.gov>; ageyster@nrsd.org <ageyster@nrsd.org>; shemman@narragansett.k12.ma.us <shemman@narragansett.k12.ma.us>; svarney@nrsd.org <svarney@nrsd.org>; ccasavant@nrsd.org <ccasavant@nrsd.org>; tcoller@nrsd.org <tcoller@nrsd.org>; dlsgateway@dor.state.ma.us <dlsgateway@dor.state.ma.us>
Cc: andrem@dor.state.ma.us <andrem@dor.state.ma.us>
Subject: EXCESS AND DEFICIENCY - Narragansett

 

Massachusetts Department of Revenue Division of Local Services

Christopher C. Harding, Commissioner

Sean R. Cronin, Senior Deputy Commissioner of Local Services

Narragansett
10/27/2019

Re: EXCESS AND DEFICIENCY - Narragansett

Based upon the unaudited balance sheet submitted, I hereby certify that the amount of excess and deficiency or "E & D" as of July 1, 2019 for Narragansett is:

General Fund $611,799.00

This certification is in accordance with the provisions of G. L. Chapter 71, §16B½, as amended. The unencumbered funds certified above in excess of five percent of the operating budget and budgeted capital costs for the succeeding fiscal year must be applied to reduce the current fiscal year's assessment. For your district, this excess amount equals $0.00.

This certification letter will also be e-mailed to the school superintendent, the board of selectmen in each member town and the city council in each member city immediately upon approval, provided an e-mail address is reported in DLS' Local Officials Directory. Please forward to other officials that you deem appropriate.

Sincerely

Mary Jane Handy

Director of Accounts
Massachusetts Department of Revenue

By MICHAEL CONNORS

Staff Writer

Published: 10/25/2019 12:13:22 AM

NORTHAMPTON — The Massachusetts House unanimously approved a historic $1.5 billion education reform bill Wednesday night, and local lawmakers in the chamber are touting the improvements they say the legislation makes to public education.

“It’s very exciting,” said Rep. Dan Carey, D-Easthampton. “The foundation of the public funding formula has not had a substantial update like this since 1993 and it’s long overdue.”

The legislation aims to rectify four substantially underfunded areas in state public education brought to light by the state Foundation Budget Review Commission four years ago. The state funding model was found to have been underestimating the cost of education by $1 billion annually by inadequately accounting for expenses related to low-income students, English learners, special education and employee health benefits.

The bill’s “revision of the formula makes sure educational opportunity is not based on your ZIP code, but that you live in Massachusetts,” said Rep. Mindy Domb, D-Amherst.

Over the last two legislative sessions, the House and Senate have failed to reach agreement on education funding reform. The collapse of negotiations on school finance bills at the end of last session prompted a renewed push from advocates this year, including the filing of a lawsuit alleging that chronic underfunding has created unconstitutional disparities in public education.

Under the House bill, Carey said, some communities in the region are less likely to see extra money due to fewer low-income and non-English-speaking students compared to larger cities in eastern Massachusetts. But there are still problems in the Pioneer Valley associated with funding for employee health care and special education.

“It will help every district use more accurate numbers for health care costs for school employees,” Carey said.

Rep. Lindsay Sabadosa, D-Northampton, said she believes more funding to support low-income students in larger cities will reverberate across the commonwealth.

“Cities don’t have big walls around them,” Sabadosa said. “If students aren’t doing well, that affects us here in Northampton and in the Pioneer Valley.”

The bill also allows for more funds to be allocated to the Massachusetts School Building Authority, Carey said, along with more money for transporting special education students placed out-of-district.

“Sometimes those out-of-district transportation costs are a lot farther and the costs are higher in our region,” he said.

Rural school districts in the state are experiencing declining enrollment, Carey said, and the bill passed by the House would create a commission to study how a per-student model of funding affects those districts through an amendment submitted by Rep. Natalie Blais, D-Sunderland.

“We absolutely need a commission that is going to study the long-term fiscal health of rural schools,” Blais said, noting declining enrollment is happening across the state.

“That will really affect the state aid they receive,” Carey said of the commission.

Sabadosa said she would have liked to see her amendment for full regional school transportation reimbursements in the final draft, but it was withdrawn. Some districts in Westhampton, Southampton and Montgomery are only being partially reimbursed for these programs, she said.

“They are really hurting because they aren’t being reimbursed to 100 percent,” Sabadosa said.

Domb said she was happy to see an amendment of hers in the House’s final draft, a stipulation which she said would require charter schools receiving public funds to submit data to the state on progress accountability plans, just as public schools do.

“The accountability that’s going to be given to district schools, that will be given to charter schools,” Domb said. “In my mind, it’s really a fairness issue.”

Carey is hopeful Gov. Charlie Baker will sign the bill, noting that there were some differences between the legislation the House passed and the Senate version that also unanimously passed earlier this month.

Most notably, the Senate bill featured a provision that removed the education commissioner’s authority to require that districts revise plans for closing achievement gaps that are found to be inadequate, instead saying the commissioner could “recommend plan amendments.”

A similar amendment was offered on the floor Wednesday night but was withdrawn, and Carey said he was surprised it was withdrawn since he thought it had some support. He said it wasn’t unusual for the House and Senate to pass non-identical bills.

“I think we’ll be able to iron out those differences,” he said.​

Domb said the fact that every elected official in both houses of the Legislature voted for substantially similar bills says a lot. The bill still needs to be reconciled in conference committee due to differences between chambers, but Domb said she was “pretty confident that something is going to come out of conference committee that we are all going to sign.”

“It’s a beautiful moment in Massachusetts history,” Domb said.

This story contains information from the State House News Service. Michael Connors can be reached at mconnors@gazettenet.com.

By GREG VINE

For the Athol Daily News

Published: 10/23/2019 9:55:09 PM

TEMPLETON – In the wake of the third joint town meeting of Templeton and Phillipston voters and a quickly-convened school committee meeting, the issue of a fiscal year 2020 budget for the Narragansett Regional School District remains unresolved.

Following often passionate debate Tuesday night voters, by the slimmest of margins, voted to approve a $19.5 million budget for the district, over $250,000 less than the more-than $19.7 million budget recommended by the school committee.

Narragansett District Education Association President Erick Eiben was among those arguing for the higher of the two figures.

“We, the teachers of the Narragansett School District are going to fight for our children and our classrooms,” he said. “The tissues we give them when their noses bleed, the pencils we give them when they don’t have them, the lunches that we give them when they don’t come with food; all of that has to come from somewhere, and your dedicated teachers provide that.”

“We need to do something,” Eiben continued, “because we’re going to be back here again. Let’s vote the higher number and fix the problem.”

“I just want to say,” said Templeton resident Sue Ocoin, arguing for the lower figure, “that the $19.5 number, from what I have been told, and in my opinion, is all the town can afford. Yes, we need teachers, but we need (the) fire (department), we need the senior center, we need the food pantry, we need meals on wheels. There are more people in this town than just the kids, and from what I’ve seen and from the children that I know, the people who are graduating from the school district are doing okay.”

Templeton Selectboard Chair said, “(The school department) can’t survive living off the same money every year, so we understand that their needs are going to increase. We understand also that they’re under tremendous pressure for not getting fully funded for transportation. They also have an antiquated foundation budget that’s working against them.”

When it comes to Templeton’s assessment for its portion of the budget, Currie said, “We can weather a 2.5 percent increase, so we added around four- or $500,000 on top of what we spent last year. But, $19.5 is the amendment we have out there so, hopefully, we figure this out here tonight.”

Templeton Advisory Committee Chair Tony DeJoy offered an amendment to split the difference between the competing budgets, putting forward a proposal for a $19.6 million spending package. That amendment, however, was shot down by a vote of 226-155.

Two very close votes followed.

One to approve the school committee’s recommendation was defeated on a recount by a margin of 214-209, after an original count showed the plan being rejected 207-205.

The vote to approve the $19.5 million budget passed by a mere six votes, 210-204.

After the town meeting adjourned, the school committee gathered to discuss its next step. Members weighed the pros and cons of either sticking with their original figure, opting to go with DeJoy’s proposed compromise, or endorsing the town meeting’s decision.

There was a great deal of discussion on exactly where cuts would be made if the committee went with either of the two lower numbers. The main concern was whether a reduction in the $19.7 million proposal would lead to kindergarten and first-grade students at Phillipston Memorial Elementary School having to be yanked from their classrooms in the middle of the academic year to be bused to Templeton Elementary. A number of staff cuts were also discussed.

A motion to go with the $19.5 million figure was defeated by a vote of 5-3 in favor. A 6-2 majority was required for approval.

The committee decided to convene again next Tuesday to discuss its next move. If it fails to certify a FY20 budget by Dec. 1, the state Dept. of Elementary and Secondary Education will impose a budget on the district.

Subject: TEMPLETON’S CONTRIBUTIONS TO ITS SCHOOLS

(from a letter written April 5, 2015)

On April 2nd The Gardner News published an article titled “Assessment Challenge Withdrawn” which contained a number of statements by Superintendent Miller regarding Templeton’s Local Contributions to school expenses.

She was quoted as saying that Templeton was “under effort” for education funding last year by nearly $ 800,000, when in fact we were nearly $ 800,000 over the “effort” level. She was also quoted as saying, “The reason that Templeton’s increase is higher … is that they’ve been under effort for a few years,” when, in fact, the last five years the town of Templeton has funded education not only above the Minimum Required Local Contribution level but, above the Target (effort) level by an average of 10 percent.

Each year the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) calculates a number of values for towns to follow while supporting their school systems. These calculations can be very complicated and confusing to the general public. When discussing these numbers it is important that you understand which value you are talking about. Each year DESE calculates a town’s - Maximum Local Contribution (MLC), Target LC, Preliminary LC, and Required LC. Two of these values are important; these are the Target LC and Required LC. To simplify this issue you need to know that the Target LC is sometimes referred to as the Effort Level and the Required LC is often called the Minimum Required Contribution. A more complete and technical definition of these terms may be found under:
 https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXII/Chapter70/Section2


The Minimum Required LC is that number that a town should never fund below. It is the absolute minimum local contribution that can be budgeted by a town for its school system. In this case, the Required LC includes two numbers, Templeton’s share of Narragansett Regional School District (NRSD) costs and our share of Montachusett Regional Vocational Technical School (MRVTS) costs.


The much higher, Target LC is that number that DESE encourages towns to contribute.


The first comment made in the April 2nd article was that Templeton’s required contributions increased recently because “… the town has been chronically ‘under effort” according to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education…” This statement is not true. The TGN article went on to quote Ms. Miller as saying, “the town was under effort by about $800,000 in the last fiscal year.” The last fiscal year was FY14.




I believe Ms. Miller may have been misquoted, because this is not true. Actually, the 800,000 difference had nothing to do with the town actually being “under effort” or below Target.
It was simply the difference between DESE’s Target figure and Required Contribution figure on a calculation sheet for FY14 that was “about $800,000”.
( FY14’s Target [effort] 4,963,418 minus FY14’s Required 4,170,850 = 792,568 )


Again, the above “$800,000” difference had nothing to do with Templeton’s actual contribution for FY14. 
In fact, the town was not only well above the Minimum Required LC but, was significantly higher than the Target LC. Templeton’s actual contribution (as related to the DESE requirements) was $5,582,130.
(ATM Art 27, voted $4,430,615 plus an override Oct STM Art 1 of $550,459 plus ATM Art 20 for Monty Tech of $601,056 = $5,582,130).


With a Target LC of 4,963,418 and actual payments of 5,582,130 Templeton was actually over the Target (effort) Local Contribution amount by 618,712. (12.5%)

Also, for this year (FY15) we will be $ 720,880 over Target Local Contribution. (14.4%)

All of the data supporting these conclusions are a matter of public record and may be found on the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s website and on the Town of Templeton’s website.

I have spoken with DESE’s and Narragansett school officials and been assured that my “numbers are all good.” However, because the preceding figures can be confusing to some, I have been asked to emphasis, in this letter, the following: Although Templeton has contributed a five year average of 10.0 percent over Target and 34 percent over Minimum Required LC, a good part of this support is due to three overrides during FY 12, 13 & 14. If you take override support out of the picture, then these percentages drop to an average of 3.8 percent over Target and 26.7 percent over Minimum Required Contributions.


The above was/is part of a project undertaken by  Templeton resident Bernard Heaney.
Unfortunately, it was largely overlooked and ignored

For the Athol Daily news

Published: 10/11/2019 9:55:21 PM

Modified: 10/11/2019 9:55:08 PM

PHILLIPSTON — Members of the Phillipston Memorial Elementary School Renovations Committee were invited to update the public and the town’s Selectboard on their efforts to determine just how much work must be done to bring the school into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, other building codes, and to generally update the more than five-decades-old school.

Before the committee’s presentation, however, Chief Administrative Officer Kevin Flynn presented a letter from Narragansett Regional School District Superintendent Chris Casavant detailing cuts that will likely be made if voters from Templeton and Phillipston once again opt to shave approximately $200,000 from the $19.7 million FY20 budget recommended by the district School Committee.

A third district-wide town meeting has been scheduled for Oct. 22, giving voters the chance to approve the $19.7 million educational budget the school committee describes as “bare bones,” or once again opt for the $19.5 million spending package approved at the first two district-wide meetings.

If the lower figure is adopted, Flynn said, Casavant “is talking about transferring kindergarten and first-grade students from Phillipston’s elementary school to Templeton’s elementary school, and getting rid of some positions here, and the high school principal, and some academic supplies to cut their budget by, according to this (letter), about $304,000.”

Finance Committee Co-Chair Tom Specht told the Selectboard and the Renovation Committee (of which he is also a member) he had just come from the NRSD School Committee meeting and that that panel had again voted to recommend the higher figure to the upcoming town meeting.

Renovation Committee Chair Dan Sanden said, “We were going along pretty well, and then suddenly the superintendent seemed to lose interest in backing (PMES). First, we heard he was going to change the whole configuration of the school – he was going to put just preschool and kindergarten kids over here – and it wouldn’t be a grade school any longer. The next thing we heard was that he had suggested that in order to balance the budget he would close the school. So, know we’re asking ourselves ‘what is going to happen? What are we going to use the school for?”

Sanden said that, regardless of what the building is used for, it will need a new roof. That’s a ‘gimme,’” he said. Sanden also said the committee decided to see what other upgrades need to be considered, particularly if the town will need to borrow money for the roof anyway.

“We hired an architectural firm about a year and a half ago,” said committee member Rick Moulton. “They did a very comprehensive study for us. They reconfigured the building, re-did blueprints. One of the big flies in the ointment, to me, is that we cannot spend more than 30 percent of the assessed value of that building over a 36-month period. The building – and land – was assessed at $1.6 million. That put us at, roughly, about $550,000 we were going to be able to spend before the ADA kicked in. Then, God knows what that will cost.”

Moulton said three quotes on a new roof, depending on the estimated life of the new roof, ranged from $170,000 to $470,000.”

“I don’t want to get into school politics, right now,” Moulton continued, “but Dr. Casavant’s intent has never been to close down Phillipston as a school. It will always be a school.”

The committee seemed to agree it will be difficult to put together definitive plans for PMES with some certainty regarding the future use of the school.

Said committee member Bernie Malouin, “We don’t want to go and put a roof on something we’re going to be ripping apart in five years.”

It was agreed that the Renovation Committee will continue to work on a final report, which will include recommendations regarding what projects for updating the school should take priority. It’s hoped the proposals will be ready for presentation to voters at the 2020 annual town meeting.

Apparently circulating on social media: in part, "Our select board (Yep looking at you, Mr. Bennett) and town administrator should be ashamed of themselves for continuing to engage in the Us. Vs. Them narrative that some very bitter, very nasty, very toxic, loud minority of people in town started a long time ago. It’s time for our elected officials to spend less time repeating what the Hatfields and McCoys are saying and more time: courting businesses;"

Well, lets break it down; it is my fault, I am one who back in 2013 stated I believe we need a one million dollar override to get the town in a better revenue position. I stated the same thing the last time and override was put before the voters, the members of the board of selectmen at the time thought it was too much and would not pass, rather than try, they put forth the minimum override. While attending a school district budget sub-committee meeting, I suggested that rather than the school accepting no increase, they get a little more from the town and that did happen (thank you voters).

Templeton had a business looking to move into the previous Baldwinville school, apparently they just backed out of that option and now we are back to square one on that front.

If the author of the social media post is serious, volunteer for the EDIC and try to help bring business into town.

On the revenue front, here is my position right now; Templeton has a tax levy and like many towns we use the maximum amount to "budget" off of. Like many other towns, Templeton does not collect 100% of the tax levy year to year, right now, the collection rate is around 97%, so I am trying to get the number at 97 or 95% and try to build up excess levy capacity, so when something arises dollar wise, the are funds available to use rather than cut, which only adds to the problem on the town side. Remember, towns are under constraints of prop 2 1/2, while regional school districts are not. In fact, regional school districts are a separate legal entity with very different rules. As a selectmen, I make as strong a case for my town as I can, because as a selectmen, I feel that is my duty and as I have told the superintendent of schools, if I was on the school committee, I would be doing the same for the school district; head to head with the towns, because that would be my duty.

Lastly, an email to the superintendent of schools:
my personal thoughts on the subject and what is at stake:

Chris;
Just so you understand, I get how or why things are posted, however, when I look at the spread sheet from the district for last night's meeting, I see Total estimated receipts (no distinguishing between general fund, special fund revolving, etc.) then I look at DESE and I see total receipts and net estimated charges; no distinguishing of general, special or revolving funds. If the charter school reimb., transportation had the up to date numbers, from DESE website, I would not have spoke.

The other thing I go with, and Carter tries to talk me down from this, is the fact that DESE totals, when added to E&D and Medicaid, it shows the district with about 400 thousand more in aid than the district's numbers, and no matter how I personally slice it, it still does not add up. My ideas on being a selectmen is to fight for all the residents first (town) while trying to be practical. If I were a school committee member, I would act the same way and I would fight harder for the entity. So, when we begin next budget talks, district and selectmen and finance committee need to get in room and talk about stuff, money! After the initial meet, perhaps we have unofficial meeting, like we had in the conference room with a selectmen from Phillipston, a finance committee from Phillipston, couple selectmen from Templeton (keeping everybody from a quorum problem) advisory committee members (couple) and town administrators. Magarette is unique as she is school comm and finance committee of Phillipston, and I suppose we could include the superintendent too. We can perhaps bang out an approach to present school funding while work up an approach to legislature for more pressure on school funding. Right now, it looks to me that the governor, legislature, DESE, Commissioner are all trying to take us (towns and regional schools) down a path that is not going to be good for any of us. When you and Carter and/or Kevin speak, please keep some of that in mind and see what they think.

regards;
Jeff Bennett

Again, once details are banged out, we have several open public meetings and we present unified approach to budget and both entities would most likely have to give a bit, but our unwavering effort should be towards the state and to add to our coalition with other towns and school districts. We have to get more state aid and involvement west of 495. So if the author of the social media post thinks I am the problem, please run for selectmen and volunteer much of your time towards the effort. I will be there to question you all the time, because that is my right as a resident.

Jeff Bennett

1 min · 

From the website of Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE)

FY20 Chapter 70 aid and required contribution calculations
Chapter 70 is the Commonwealth's program for ensuring adequate and equitable K–12 education funding. It determines an adequate spending level for each school district (the foundation budget). It then uses each community's property values and residents' incomes to determine how much of the foundation budget should be funded from local property taxes. Chapter 70 state aid pays for the remaining amount.

Narragansett foundation enrollment is listed at 1290 students.
FY 2020 Foundation budget listed at $14,647,553.00.

How foundation budgets are calculated
In Massachusetts, the definition of an adequate spending level for a school district is called its foundation budget. The goal of the Chapter 70 formula is to ensure that every district has sufficient resources to meet its foundation budget spending level, through an equitable combination of local property taxes and state aid. The foundation budget is perhaps the most important factor used in calculating a district’s Chapter 70 state education aid.

The foundation budget has its origins in three milestones:

• The Massachusetts Business Alliance for Education’s (MBAE) release of Every Child a Winner, an influential report that laid the groundwork for what would ultimately become the 1993 Education Reform Act. In the report, MBAE calls for “high standards, accountability for performance, and equitable distribution of resources among school districts.”

• McDuffy v. Secretary of the Executive Office of Education (1993), where the Supreme Judicial Court held that the education clause imposes on the Commonwealth “an enforceable duty to provide an education for all students regardless of wealth through the public schools.”

• The 1993 Education Reform Act, “which for the first time, established a required ‘foundation’ level of spending for each district in the Commonwealth that was to be reached by the establishment of both a state-mandated, required local contribution and a supplemental amount of state aid.”

October 2, 2019

This is a document that has not been shared with anyone as of yet.    

The "19,600,000" number is with a Teacher and a Nurse cut.  We are trying to find "other options" but this is all we have at this moment.  

The $19,6 number is a heck of a lot better option than the 19,5

Chris  Casavant

Superintendent of Schools

$19,646,988.00

ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION                        AMOUNT
KINDERGARTEN PARA -                          $   18,133            Cut K Para
ELEM TEACHER SALARIES -                  $   46,019            Cut K Teacher
ELEMENTARY NURSE -                            $   49,354            1.5 FTE @ TC & .5 FTE @ PMS
MS LIBRARY SUPPLIES -                          $    1,000
HS LIBRARY SUPPLIES -                          $    1,000
MOST SUPPLY ACTS -                              $  18,469            CUT 10%
COMPUTER SOFTWARE NURSING -       $    6,025            GRANT CAN COVER
19,786,988 140,000
TOTAL CUTS -                                             $140,000           $19,646,988

$19,500.00) SUPPLY ACCTS -                    $11,222               CUT 10%
HS ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT -               $   3,000                 $5000 Remains
MS/HS ELECTRICITY -                               $   3,000
ELEM TEACHER SALARIES -                     $47,054               Cut 1st Grade Teacher
PRINCIPAL -                                                 $100,000             $19,786,988
                                                                                                         $304,276

TOTAL CUTS -                                              $304,276              $19,482,712


Again, looking at total aid that is posted from/by Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, the NRSD will receive 19.8 million dollars for FY 2020 when added to Towns assessments already voted. Do not be deceived.

Dear Parents and Guardians,

During the FY20 budget process, it was clear that the Narragansett Regional School District was going to have a budget shortfall. The proposed expenses outweigh the anticipated revenues by $1,176,169. The School Committee certified a budget of $20,383,102 on March 6, 2019. Given that the override did not subsequently pass in both District member towns, this necessitated the need for the School Committee to recertify their budget and consider other options. At this point the School Committee reduced their original budget by $596,213, bringing the budget to where it currently stands at $19,786,889. Since then, the District and it’s member towns have had various meetings, to include two district wide meetings, to approve funding to meet the revised amount of $19,786,889. At both District Wide meetings an amended budget amount of $19,500,000 was passed by majority vote. On both occasions, the NRSD School Committee voted to recertify the FY20 (current and higher) amount of $19,786,889. On Tuesday October 1, 2019 the NRSD School Committee met and requested a list of cuts that would need to be made in order to reduce our budget by $286,889, thereby bringing the FY20 budget to $19,500,000: 1 Kindergarten Teacher (PMES) $ 46,019 Library Supplies (HS) $ 2,000 1 1st Grade Teacher (PMES) $ 47,054 Computer Software (District) $ 6,025 1 Kindergarten Para (PMES) $ 18,133 General Supplies ( District) $ 29,691 1 Nurse Position (PMES) $ 49,354 Facilities Bldg. Acct (HS/MS) $ 3,000 1 Principal (HS) $100,000 Academic Achievement (HS) $ 3,000 Total Cuts = $304,276

● The number of Kindergarten teachers will be reduced districtwide from 6 to 5; requiring that we combine the PMES Kindergarten students into the (5) TES Kindergarten classrooms. The paraprofessional position assigned to that “6th” Kindergarten classroom will be cut as well.
● The number of first grade teachers will be reduced districtwide from 5 to 4; requiring that we combine the PMES first grade students into the (4) TES first grade classrooms.
● A nursing position will be eliminated; two nurses will support both elementary schools (TES & PMES), requiring one of them to travel between both schools.
● The High School Principal position will be eliminated; requiring the sharing of the administrative responsibilities between the Middle and High Schools by District administration.

 On October 22, 2019 at 7pm, the voters of Templeton and Phillipston will engage in their final District Wide meeting. The results of this upcoming meeting will ultimately determine the budget number that the School Committee will take under advisement for certification. Simply put, if the $19,500,000 (the lower number) is voted at the District Wide meeting and certified by the NRSD School Committee, the above listed cuts will take place. In closing, I hope that the registered voters of this District take part of the process, regardless of their position on this matter. It is vitally important that people not only vote their heart, but that they are an active part of this very important process.
Sincerely,
Dr. Chris Casavant
Superintendent of Schools