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