Budget Committee Meeting

                                                         Approved Minutes

                                                               November 22, 2005

                                            Roxbury Town Hall, Roxbury, NH

 

Members present: Gary Bednarski, Dick Bauries, Chair Jane Fortson, Thomas Parker, Robert Smith, Neil Moriarty, John Tommila, Robert Mitchell, Karen Cota, Eric Stanley, Don Arguin, and Nancy Johnson. Absent: Terry Clark, Stephen Russell and Neal King.

Administrators Present: K. Dassau, Superintendent, D. Hodgdon, Dir. of Curriculum and L. Biron, Business Manager.

  

J. Fortson called the meeting to order at 7:06 PM.

 

1.      Approval of the October 15, 2005 Minutes: MOTION: G. Bednarski MOVED to accept the October 15, 2005 Minutes as presented. SECOND: Neil Moriarty. VOTE: 6.32/0/3.73/5.95. Motion passes.

2.   Public Comments: W. Imon explained that the Budget Committee is discussing the default budget but needs to focus on the actual budget the voters would be voting on.

            

3.   Budget Committee Updates:

a.      Default Budget Subcommittee Report: J. Fortson reported that the committee met on Nov. 17, 05 and elected T. Parker as the chair. They reviewed the version of the default budget proposed by J. Fortson. The committee will be meeting on Nov. 29, 05 a half an hour before the meeting to go over the items discussed. G. Bednarski asked how it would raise the budget. J. Fortson explained that she does not know yet because she has not yet received all the health insurance increases.

 

b.      School Board Facilities Committee Update: K. Cota reported that the Board reviewed the first draft of the warrant articles. The Board changed the wording in Article Three. In Article Six they would like the funds to come from taxes instead of a surplus. The Board also would like the funding for Article Four to come from taxes not a surplus however the Board tabled the motion until after the Facilities Committee met with H.L. Turner. She explained that the dollar amount in the Article is not Board approved. The Board asked K. Cota to draft a warrant on the unanticipated maintenance expenses. G. Bednarski commented that the voters approved a $100,000.00 for architectural work. K. Cota explained that there was no surplus. G. Bednarski asked if the Board intends to have a warrant for a construction project. K. Cota explained that the Facilities would be meeting with H.L. Turner on Nov. 30, 05 and from that meeting they would be bringing a recommendation to the full Board.

 

D. Arguin arrives.

 

K. Cota explained that she does not remember discussing a warrant article for an expendable emergency trust fund warrant article. K. Cota asked if that is to come from the Facilities Committee. L. Biron said that he would track that. K. Dassau explained that the Board would be discussing the Reverse 911 City Watch. B. Tatro asked N. Moriarty about the system. R. Bauries commented that he discussed the articles and feels that Article Ten needs to be put up front on the ballot. The deficit should be at the beginning of the ballot. He said that it is good politics to tell the people at the beginning. He said that C. Cardine said that was true. It should be put in the front. R. Bauries said that he would like that changed. K. Dassau explained that no one ever said that would not be changed. K. Dassau explained that he forgot to tell L. Biron to change it on the warrant. T. Parker said that it was his impression that a bond issue was to be placed after the election of officers. L. Biron explained that information items are to come after money items. K. Dassau explained that DOR would correct the sequence of the articles. R. Bauries mentioned that C. Cardine said it had been in the beginning and L. Biron said to review the annual report. The information is not at the beginning. N. Moriarty asked if they are only guidelines. L. Biron said that they are guidelines until they tell him what to do. He would be checking it out. K. Dassau talked about the 911 proposal of the town vs. the district.  

 

            c.   Budget Oversight Subcommittee Report: The committee would be meeting on Dec. 1, 2005 at the SAU Building.

 

4.      Discussion of the 2006-2007 proposed budget: J. Fortson handed out her version of the budget. She explained the columns to the committee. N. Moriarty commented that the cuts that were suggested by the Budget Committee last year were not used to get the budget down. T. Parker would assume that the health benefits increase would be in the default budget. L. Biron commented that the district has used a lot of health care. T. Parker suggested the employees share the increase. L. Biron explained that last year there were 4 cancer cases and a lot of health care used by the 750 members in the district. He said that 2/3 of the teachers are off schedule and a little bit older. He said that it is a lot of health care and the utilization is very high. L. Biron spoke to Wendy Parker who would be contacting Anthem about the increase. The District is rated as their own group. T. Parker suggested that Monadnock be removed from the SAU. L. Biron commented that it could be worse. T. Parker commented that they should be shopping for better rates. He said that 26.8% is unacceptable. He said that the employees need to pick up a piece of the plan or have fewer employees. He said that the SAU has a long record of not getting bids. T. Parker questioned the bids for the oil for the upcoming year. L. Biron explained that they did go out to bid and only 2 out of 6 companies said that they would deal with the district. L. Biron said that Health Trust is a non-profit agency. T. Parker commented that there needed to be a break somewhere. E. Stanley commented on the idea about an increase in pay if the employee opted out of the health benefits. K. Dassau explained that they do offer $1000.00 to employees who opt out of the benefit. E. Stanley asked how many employees take the insurance package. L. Biron said that about 99.5% of the employees do. He said that it is a great package for the Aides. R. Bauries said that in other companies the insurance has increased around 7%. He said that this would kill the teacher’s contract. R. Bauries said that it was a million-dollar increase last year and would like to know what it would be this year. L. Biron said that with a 20% increase it was at $585,000.00 but he is not sure with the 26.8% increase. R. Bauries said that there should be a motion to get three bids. N. Johnson asked if it is a 20% increase on the budget or an increase on the health benefits. L. Biron explained that he would have to calculate the budget. He has to price out every member individually. J. Fortson would propose that a report be done on the health and dental only. L. Biron said that once he has the numbers he could separate health care only. G. Bednarski asked if the contract allows the district to shop around. L. Biron said that you might have a grievance. J. Tommila told L. Biron that a health care provider told him that he was not allowed in to the SAU to give a bid. L. Biron asked if it was Hamel. J. Tommila would not say. L. Biron said that Hamel wanted to quote life insurance and disability. L. Biron said that he did not know whom J. Tommila was referring to. J. Tommila asked if L. Biron tried Roy Brothers. L. Biron said that there were 6 companies and Roy Brothers was one. K. Cota commented that the comments about health care are good but our hands are tied. There is not a lot that we can do. She suggested taking the comments to Congress and the local representatives. She said that everyone is upset and there is negative talk. She would like to talk about the budget and the benefit to the children. K. Cota explained that they are in negotiations and that the only thing that if they choose to is to turn down the teacher’s contracts in March. L. Biron explained that if the teachers agree to a benefit agreement the budget could be adjusted up to Jan. L. Biron said that if you leave the Health Trust you might not be able to return. They do not want the ping-pong effect. It is really disruptive. R. Bauries commented on the 2 and ½ million-dollar increase in 36 months and said that you could do a lot for the children with that money. He said that the Budget Committee Members are the money people. He said that the Board took 5 minutes at the last meeting to review the budget. He said that K. Cota is out of line suggesting moving on. K. Cota said that you could not change it. T. Parker said that the problem is the administration of the district’s failure to look at everything we spend. K. Dassau should find an insurance consultant to come in, take a look and come back with ideas. J. Fortson commented that the latest insurance numbers are not in there. What is in there is the administration’s salary increases and could we move on to those. K. Dassau explained that the principals would have to defend the increase. An information sheet was passed out to the members from the NHSBA. K. Dassau explained that the principals had discussed an increase in their salaries. They looked at the per diem rate of the teachers, dept. heads and principals. The principals work 260 days, the v. principals work 205 days and the teachers 188 days. In order to achieve equity the increase would have to be 18%. The principals knew that they could not ask for that increase so they are asking for a 6% increase. They would take the pool of money and divide it equally but not everyone would receive 6%. R. Bauries said that he thought that 6% was too much plus the health care increases. He commented on the SAU Board saying not more that 3½ % of an increase. K. Dassau said that the SAU Board wanted a budget increase of fewer than 5%. R. Bauries said that raises should be based on performance. R. Bauries said that there are some that should receive a raise. J. Fortson commented that it is a $4,681.00 raise per person. L. Biron said that figure was in the ballpark. K. Cota asked the role of the dept. head.  J. Smith explained the role of the dept. head to the Budget Committee. K. Cota asked if the dept. chair was part of the contract. L. Biron said that it is determined separately. K. Dassau explained that it is part of their contract but not the bargaining unit. L. Biron explained that the stipends are on another line from the salary. K. Dassau explained that it is like the coach’s salaries. K. Dassau explained that dept. heads are in the bargaining unit and would not evaluate the teachers. Betty Tatro explained that she has 25 teachers and there are not enough hours in the day. T. Parker asked how many hours a day the teachers work. K. Dassau said that they work 7 and ½ to 8 hours a day. He said that you need to understand that a teacher’s day is not the same as a student’s day. N. Moriarty asked the hours in a day at the elementary school. The average day for the children is about 6 and ½ hours. R. Bauries asked if the step raises are given only if the budget passes. G. Bednarski asked if you fall back on the previous contract. K. Dassau said that the step increases are included in the default budget. It would be in the evergreen clause. He said that the district has always given them the step increases. It is stated that all the terms and conditions apply. If the Budget Committee were to say no then there would be a court case and the teachers would prevail. R. Bauries said that is a double dip with the step and the raises. K. Dassau said that he calls it that. R. Bauries said that the step with the contract in place. He said that there is no contract if there is no vote. K. Dassau commented that they would take you to court. N. Moriarty asked if the step raises listed end this year. K. Dassau stated that all the terms and conditions apply. N. Moriarty said no. K. Dassau commented on the evergreen clause and said that it is an issue for litigation. R. Bauries said that the School Board gave the step increase not the contract. K. Dassau said that was his interpretation. G. Bednarski asked if the step increase were in the budget passed out. L. Biron said yes. G. Bednarski said that two years ago it was $95,000.00. L. Biron said it could be $100,000.00 with the hire of 6 new teachers at the high school. T. Parker felt that the 7.72% increase in the budget needed to be reduced. K. Dassau said that they would look at reducing the 7.72% increase depending on what is needed to run the schools. The figures need to be run past the School Board and come back with a number. He asked if the Budget Committee had a sense of what they think the number should be. He asked that the Budget Committee explain to the administration what they think is important and then the administration would tell the Budget Committee what they think is important to the schools. J. Fortson commented on the increase in Spec. Ed. R. Bauries commented on the number of secretaries at the high school and said that it was overkill. He said that the number has to be reduced on the labor side and the stuff that is not essential. K. Dassau commented on the reduction of a teacher and aide at the middle school. N. Moriarty commented that you want suggestions where to cut but last year nothing suggested was done, absolutely nothing. K. Dassau said that he is asking for parameters. He would like to hear suggestions. He would like his side heard and then the Budget Committee’s side. This conversation needs to happen.  N. Moriarty asked what difference it makes. The Board is going to do what they want. K. Dassau commented on the obligation of the Budget Committee and N. Moriarty said it’s within the 7 lines. K. Dassau commented that the public needs to know where you disagree. N. Moriarty said that he was disappointed because zero happened last year. J. Tommila commented that the increases are in the salaries, benefits and the Spec. Ed.  He said that the elementary schools run pretty tight. He commented that the reality is that the principals are no better than the teachers or support staff. D. Arguin said that he was sad to hear the talk about health care. He commented that at some point you need to stop hammering the administration. He would like the administration to come back with columns A, B and C. He would like the administration to take the lead on the cuts and the Budget Committee to figure out how deep it should go. He said that this method worked well in the past. G. Bednarski said that the talk should be around staff reduction. That is the only way to get it done. He commented that the nickel and dime approach has been done. D. Arguin stated that the Spec. Ed. is going up and the Regular Ed. is not. This is a disservice cutting the Regular Ed  The Committee needs to take a look at the increase in Spec. Ed. L. Biron commented that the Spec. Ed. costs stated in the Annual Report last year were over 7 million-dollars. K. Cota asked what the options are and commented that our hands are tied. G. Bednarski said that you could do nothing about Spec. Ed. K. Cota said that the health care and the teachers you could do nothing. G. Bednarski commented on the highest health care. K. Cota said that you could stop the contract. N. Moriarty said bodies. T. Parker commented that the Board has control of what would fly or not fly on the ballot in March. He asked K. Cota if they were looking at 21 new classrooms. K. Cota said that they have not decided. T. Parker said that if you want the health care and the teacher’s contracts the rest would not fly. He said to eliminate what you least need and push what you really need. R. Bauries commented that if the budget were high the rest would go down and that the budget would drive the rest of the warrants. N. Moriarty said to save time and asked who would be preparing the new spreadsheet. J. Fortson suggested that the administration come back or put ideas into a hat. K. Dassau commented that the administration would go back to the School Board and look at the parameters. J. Fortson said that the administration would be coming back with A, B and C cuts. G. Bednarski asked about the joint meeting with the School Board. He commented that we do not know what we are doing. The meeting is tentatively set for Dec. 13, 2005. K. Dassau commented that the administrative team would not be back until Tuesday that does not give much time to prepare for next Tuesday’s meeting.        

 

5.   Public Comment Period: J. Tommila asked about the legal opinion on last year’s Article Ten. J. Fortson stated that she forwarded the opinion to J. Tommila. He said that he has not seen it. K. Dassau explained the response from the attorney. N. Moriarty said that in his opinion the lawyer understated it. G. Bednarski said that the language is just too general. J. Tommila commented that he wanted to remind you gentlemen to have courtesy and decency toward the voters. This was tucked in the budget and this is why push came to shove. K. Dassau said that it is not his lawyer it was a recommendation from the Budget Committee to the School Board. J. Tommila commented that the Board basically slapped 1/3 of the voters in the face. K. Dassau said that it was a slap in the face four years ago and to let it go. J. Tommila asked about the MC2 School and asked why there was a separate principal. K. Dassau said that K. Carter is a separate director of the program. J. Tommila said that there is one more year and asked if Monadnock was going to pick it up after the grant runs out. K. Dassau commented on the benefits of the program and the $380,000.00 in revenue to the District. He said that there is conversation about an extension grant. 

 

  8. Setting the Agenda:

1.      Default budget

2.      2006-2007 Budget

3.      Article to reduce Board size with time permitting

     

      J. Fortson explained that the Article to reduce Board size would be under Public Comments.

 

 MOTION: R. Smith MOVED to adjourn at 9:40 PM by unanimous consent. SECOND: J. Tommila VOTE: Unanimous for those present. . Motion passes.  

 

Respectfully submitted, 

 

Laura L. Aivaliotis

MRSD Recording secretary