Last October the Bronxville Board of Education established a goal to “conduct a comprehensive budget review that minimizes taxpayer expense. Budget options resulting in flat or lower taxes will be considered.” This goal stemmed not only from the immediate financial pressures of recession and economic turmoil, but also from the cumulative effects of rising costs that have outstripped inflation -- especially in the area of salaries and benefits.
Our spending plan supports the programs and services we have developed to “bring out the best in all students”. Over the years previous Boards of Education have reviewed and endorsed these efforts, and we are proud of the results. Nevertheless, with finite – perhaps dwindling – resources available, it becomes necessary to reexamine current practice and find new, more cost effective ways to accomplish our objectives.
Unfortunately, creating a sustainable model of excellence in a time of fiscal austerity does not fall entirely within our local control. A partial list of what we don’t control includes:
- Local property taxes as the basis for financing schools
- Local property assessments and tax certioraris
- State aid formula
- Mandated academic programs, including time requirements
- Special education
- Employer contributions to the state retirement system
- Collective bargaining, labor relations law, and existing contracts
- School construction requirements
- Utility rates
- Health premiums.
Last Year
In February of 2009, our initial budget showed an increase of 3.6%. After Board review the increase dropped to 1.1%. The reductions largely fell in the area of efficiencies such as flood-related expenses and salary savings associated with a negotiated retirement incentive. Enrollment patterns permitted a 1.0 downward adjustment at the Middle School. A .6 administrator position was not replaced. The Board applied $400,000 of fund balance to offset the tax levy. Throughout this process the Board of Education declined to eliminate enrichment programs or increase class size beyond existing guidelines. In May, voters approved the proposed budget by a wide margin.
Later in the spring, as course enrollments were finalized and other vacancies occurred, the administration made still further reductions by hiring new teachers at lower salaries or by deciding not to fill certain positions at all (including full time social studies and science teachers and a part-time computer teacher at the High School). Taken together, these reductions and efficiencies generated lower-than-expected expenses for 2009-10 and set the stage for the current budget cycle.
This Year: The Rollover Budget
The initial budget for 2010-11 reflects the priorities imbedded in the school and district presentations made over the past four months. Those presentations described current staffing levels, the scope of mandated academic programs, the enrichment programs that go beyond minimum requirements, and the student services that help all students achieve. The schools and district also described our future direction – professional development that supports our global education initiative, an improving school climate, and continued progress on the strategic plan completed in 2005.
To operate the same programs in 2010-11 as we offer today would result in a budget-to-budget increase of 1.23%. This “rollover budget” includes everything we currently know about utility rates, health premiums, contractual salary obligations, retirement contributions, and the cost of contracted services. Because we are in negotiations with four bargaining units, with unknown results, this rollover budget includes no wage increases beyond the step increases that are built into several contracts. In addition, a variety of operational spending cuts and a special retirement incentive also lowered the rollover costs.
Getting to Zero
To meet our budget goal will require a further reduction of approximately $540,000 (0% budget increase) or $1,180,000 (0% tax rate – reflecting declining property assessments). We have presented for Board discussion a series of options that could meet those targets. These options fall in three categories: (1) efficiencies, (2) program reductions, and (3) structural changes.
Some of these budget options will have more advocacy (or more opposition) than others. However, popular support is not the same thing as arriving at a decision that makes the best sense for all students rather than a few. Some decisions that seem attractive today may not hold up well in the future. We should anticipate opportunity costs or other unintended consequences, such as the need to retain and nurture faculty leadership across the district.
Next Year
Even if the economy rebounds, the District will again face a need to contain costs in the 2011 budget, and the adverse pressures are likely to increase. Revenues in the form of state aid are likely to decline. Health care costs are likely to rise. If salary agreements are negotiated successfully, any wage increases or other contractual obligations must be factored into our planning. If the Board elects to use fund balance to offset the tax rate in 2010, what will be available in the future? After two years of belt tightening, there will be fewer opportunities for additional trimming in supplies and equipment. Without a retirement incentive, we will not be able to replicate the salary savings we realized in 2009 and 2010. Our five year building conditions survey may identify additional facilities needs that require attention.
Tough Choices
The Board will undoubtedly weigh its options in terms of how each program, service, or resource contributes to our mission. Some questions to consider are listed below.
What is the relevant history of the positions, programs, or services under consideration?
What previous productivity improvements or reductions have been carried out in this area?
What are the key results in terms of student learning, costs, and satisfaction?
What are the short- and long-term consequences of a reduction?
- Implementation challenges
- Legal and contractual
- Practical – who will do the work? What will not get done?
- What are the longer-range consequences?
