ENFIELD TOWN COUNCIL
MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING
MONDAY, APRIL 10, 2008
A Special Meeting of the Enfield Town Council and Enfield Board of Education was called to order by Chairman Kaupin in the Enfield Public Library on Middle Road, Enfield, Connecticut on Thursday, April 10, 2008. The meeting was called to order at 6:05 p.m.
ROLL-CALL – Present were Councilmen Bosco, Dumont, Kaupin, Kiner, Jones, Mangini, Nelson and Ragno. Councilman Edgar arrived at 6:25 and Councilman Lee entered at 6:35 p.m. Councilmen Crowley was absent. Also present were Town Manager, Matthew Coppler; Town Clerk, Suzanne Olechnicki; Director of Finance, Lynn Nenni; Chief Technology Officer, Paul Russell; Director of Libraries, Henry Dutcher
Present from the Enfield Board of Education were Judith Apruzzese-Desroches, Thomas Arnone, Patrick Droney, Andre Greco, Joyce Hall and Charles Johnson. Susan Lavelli-Hozempa, Greg Stokes, and Vincent Grady were absent. Also present were Superintendent of Schools, Dr. John Gallacher; Assistant Superintendent of Schools, Anthony Torre; Business Manager, Christopher Drezek; Director of Human Resources, Craig Cooke; Director of School Facilities, Arthur Pongratz
Chairman Kaupin stated according to the Town Manager, they were unable to get the proper documentation from the leasing company, therefore, they will bypass this item.
RESOLUTION #9760 by Councilman Nelson, seconded by Councilman Ragno.
RESOLVED, that in accordance with Chapter VI, Section 8(f) of the Town Charter, the following transfer is hereby made:
TO: General Fund Transfers out $60,000
FROM: General Fund Balance $60,000
I hereby certify the amount of $60,000 is available from the General Fund Balance as of April 10, 2008.
/s/ Lynn Nenni, Director of Finance
Mr. Coppler stated they don’t have the specifics regarding which vehicle they are purchasing off the State bid, but they’ve estimated the cost would be $20,000 per vehicle and $60,000 for three vehicles. He stated if there is a desire by Council to purchase the cars they’re going to be leasing from Artioli, they could possibly do that. He noted they’re still waiting for a purchase price from Artioli, and that would require a bid waiver. He stated if the Council wishes to do that, they could come back on Monday with a bid waiver resolution.
Chairman Kaupin questioned the Council’s thoughts about moving forward off the State’s bid list, or is there a preference to move forward off an Artioli bid, however, that would require a bid waiver and action by the Council at a subsequent meeting.
Councilman Bosco stated if Artioli is going to be competitive in the prices, they might as well keep the business in town.
Councilman Mangini disagreed and stated her belief due to the time constraints the Council is faced with, they need to move forward and she’s comfortable with the $60,000 purchase price.
Councilman Kiner stated he would like to transfer the funds this evening and have an opportunity to speak with the Chief of Police.
Mr. Coppler stated they probably won’t have the replacement vehicles in time. He noted they would have time to have this discussion on Monday, and by that time they should have the information from the Police Department as to which cars would be taken off the State bid.
Chairman Kaupin stated by moving forward, they would still be moving toward the ultimate goal.
Upon a ROLL-CALL vote being taken, the Chair declared RESOLUTION #9760 adopted 8-0-0.
RESOLUTION #9761 by Councilman Nelson, seconded by Councilman Mangini.
TO: 2100-08730-0732 Public Safety $60,000
FROM: CIP Transfer in $60,000
I hereby certify the amount of $60,000 is available from the CIP transfers in as of April 10, 2008.
Upon a ROLL-CALL vote being taken, the Chair declared RESOLUTION #9761 adopted 8-0-0.
PRESENTATION OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION BUDGET
Chairman of the Enfield Board of Education, Andre Greco, presented the Board of Education budget.
Mr. Greco explained the process to create the proposed budget. He noted their objective was to create a 2008/2009 operating budget that enhances the educational experience for the students. He listed the methodology used in the creation of this budget:
· They would do due diligence through a structured process
· Engage the community
· Engagement of key advisors
· Ask the difficult questions
· Focus on the education impact, not just the dollars and cents
· Move forward – there have been too many years of status quo or stagnation
Mr. Greco spoke about the calendar of meetings that the Board of Education held, which were dedicated solely to the budget. He pointed out a lot of people and effort were put into the creation of this budget, and they had many advisors during this process. He stated the Board of Education Budget Review Committee was formed six months prior to beginning this process. He noted some of those advisors included Dr. Gallacher, the Business Manager, the Administrative Council, the ETA, faculty and staff and School Facilities Director. He stated they brought in Harry Captain, who used to be on the Enfield Board of Education. He noted Mr. Captain is now on the Board of Education in West Hartford and shared with the Board how his town does their budget. He stated he provided some good ideas about creating short and long-term objectives and gearing a budget to meet those objectives.
He stated the starting point in putting this budget together was the existing budget, which was approximately $69.5 million dollars, and they then added in contractual costs, salaries, benefits, transportation, athletics and maintenance contracts the school system is involved in so they could come up with a 2008-2009 starting point of $72.3 million dollars. He noted in the past, this would have been called status quo, or a needs-based budget. He stated that starting point equates to a 3.9% budget increase, and that is just to capture contractual increases.
Mr. Greco stated the first area where they were able to find some reductions was through the Budget Review Committee. He noted this Committee was comprised of three Board
members – Mrs. Hall, Mrs. Appruzzese-Desroches, Mrs. Lavelli-Hozempa and Business Manager, Chris Drezek. He stated their charge was to do a line-by-line analysis of the budget with a focus on year-over-year expenditures. He noted they looked at what they really spent, and created the numbers accordingly. He stated through a long, arduous process, they were able to save $266,455 out of the budget.
He shared a line item list and break-out of how the $266,455 is made up. He pointed out this comes from many different areas such as longevity stipends, elementary lunchroom aides, school-to-career transportation, virtual high school, microfilm storage, vehicle repairs and maintenance. He stated they did not eliminate any of those things from the budget, rather they simply looked at past years and figured out what they really had spent and adjusted accordingly.
Mr. Greco stated additional reductions that are part of this proposed budget are as follows: retired teachers are typically replaced by a new teacher who is brought in on the first step of the pay grade; administrative positions, which did not start until later in the year; health care savings. He pointed out through these areas they were able to reduce the budget by $661,500.
He shared a breakdown where savings were realized:
He stated they looked further and were able to pull out some additional reductions. He noted they increased fees for some programs, and they eliminated some areas where they had traditionally reimbursed costs, enrollment in certain class sessions, facilities. He noted through these reductions, the Board was able to make an additional $370,000 in reductions.
Mr. Greco referred to reorganizing class sessions and noted they’re not sure this can be done. He explained they have the ability to reorganize classes, typically at the secondary level, based on who is signing up to take those classes, however, they won’t know that until September. He noted they have a $250,000 figure, which they may or may not be able to realize.
He stated they looked at even more reductions, i.e., eliminating a technology teacher; eliminating three elementary library clerks, eliminating the TLC Reading Program, eliminating the Elementary Language Arts Chair and the Elementary Math Chair, a $50,000 reduction in library books, elimination of a middle school library assistant, elimination of the Partnership & Mentoring Program, consolidation of the Curriculum Department, removing Department Chairs at the secondary level, consolidation in the Special Education Department, elimination of Head Teacher stipends, reducing the number of elementary Guidance Counselors from nine to six, elimination of the Night Custodian Supervisor position, eliminating the School to Career Labs, elimination of Faculty Managers, elimination of a high school Guidance Counselor, high school Assistant Principal and a Special Education Coordinator. Mr. Greco emphasized that the reduction in any of these areas would have a significant negative impact on the students’ educational experience. He pointed out an impact statement has been provided on each and every one of these positions.
Mr. Greco stated they then looked at $3.4 million dollars in additions to the budget. He referred to the list of every addition, i.e., vice principals at the Elementary Schools, all day Kindergarten, athletic equipment and band uniforms. He stated because they understand where the Council wants to go this year, it would have been a futile effort on the Board’s part to bring forth these additions.
He emphasized the need to make forward progress. He noted they identified some areas where they must make investments, i.e., technology, textbooks, grant writing, special education, the arts, No Child Left Behind. These investments equate to $678,000. He pointed out this is less than one percent, but it gives them the ability to at least move forward a little bit, instead of being stagnant.
Mr. Greco stated the proposed budget amounts to $71.7 million dollars at a 3% increase.
He then reviewed unknown factors. He noted that although there’s a concerted effort to repeal it, legislation has already been passed that will result in the In-School Suspension Bill going into effect January 1, 2009. He stated this means that the majority of the students that they’d typically have on out-of-school suspension will be in the building, and all of those students will have to be supervised and educated. He noted that cannot be done with existing staff or certified personnel who have the ability to deliver curriculum. He pointed out if this bill does go into effect, it’s predicted there will be a $100,000 hit.
Mr. Greco stated two vice principal positions and one elementary principal position have to be filled. He noted there’s a competitive market, and they need to aggressively advertise and recruit to get the right people. He pointed out recruiting is costly, and it’s predicted it will cost an additional $50,000 to fill just those three positions.
He spoke about inter-district magnet school enrollment. He noted the State passed legislation last year which states that if a student from Enfield wants to go to an inter-district magnet school, Enfield pays if that student is accepted. He stated Enfield has no control over how many students go to a magnet school, and it’s solely Enfield’s cost to bear. He pointed out this has already happened. He noted the Board projected a $100,000 expense.
Mr. Greco stated there is a class size reduction grant which the school system has been involved in for the last five years, and this is a $100,000 grant, and it’s finished. He noted they now have to fund that $100,000.
He stated they’re nearly done with a list of unfunded mandates amounting to 15% to 20% of the overall budget, which equates to about $14 million dollars. He explained this is a result of federal and state legislation that has been passed.
Mr. Greco stated without the 3% increase, the Board of Education will have to find the money, and that will open a whole new level of discussion. He pointed out there will be no additions and no forward progress. He stated every year that there’s no forward progress, the morale gets lower. He noted employee resignations continue going up because teachers are leaving for more progressive school systems.
He noted this proposed budget was approved unanimously by the Board of Education, and all nine members believed 3% to be a fair number, although they would have liked more. He pointed out this was not the budget process of old because they did the work up front and the number they were going to bring to the Council was the number they absolutely needed to have, and that is what they did.
Mr. Greco stated this budget process was extremely disruptive, emotional and it caused contention. He apologized for all the stress this caused on everyone, however, this process needed to be done because it hasn’t been done in so long.
He stated the 3% requested is amongst the lowest in the state. He noted to date, the average request from Board of Educations to their Councils or Boards of Finance is 5.9%. He noted the 3% is not status quo or needs-based, but rather it’s what they all need to do to keep Enfield a great place to learn and a great place to live. He strongly encouraged the Town Council to give the Board of Education this 3%. He urged the Council not do it for political reasons, but do it because it’s the right thing to do for the students in this community.
Chairman Kaupin commended the Board for their work on this budget. He applauded the Board for taking the time to do the hard work up front.
Councilman Kiner questioned if the $350,000 of unknown factors is within the $71 million dollars, and Mr. Greco responded no.
Councilman Kiner referred to the $250,000 in reductions regarding reorganizing class sessions and requested clarification on the “if applicable”. Mr. Greco explained that means if they’re able to pull it off. He noted they’re committed to taking that $250,000 reduction, but they may not be able to do it through that process.
Councilman Mangini expressed her appreciation for an excellent presentation. She noted she would like some feedback from other members of the Board.
Mrs. Hall pointed out the Board voted unanimously for this proposed budget. She noted it was an agonizing process to get to 3%. She stated they all felt 3% was not unreasonable considering all the work the school does in the Town.
Mr. Johnson stated they have been trying to enhance what the students can receive from the schools, and this budget does that. He feels the 3% is adequate and sufficient in order to give students what they need.
Mrs. Apruzzese-Desroches stated this was a very ambitious budget for the Board with the unknown factors and the potential classroom reorganization savings. She noted they are going on the line to say that they may have to find, even with a 3% increase, another $600,000 in cuts. She pointed out this Board of Education was seated in November, and since that time, they’ve done nothing but budget work.
Mr. Droney stated these decisions weren’t made in a vacuum. He noted he visited the schools to investigate programs such as the TLC program. He stated he was very impressed by this program and the increase in the ability of these students to read and comprehend. He noted he went to the library and learned a library aide is actually a librarian, and it would have a significant impact on the students if they eliminated that position. He feels all nine members are on the Board of Education not to slash and burn, but to be fiscally responsible to the taxpayers as well as to enhance education.
Mr. Arnone agreed with Mr. Greco’s comments and believes he speaks for all nine members of the Board. He stated the Board needs the $600,000 back.
Councilman Kiner stated his belief everyone agrees it’s important to invest in the future of children. He questioned where the Town Manager sees the $600,000 coming from, and Mr. Coppler stated going into the budget, he heard very loud and clear that he needed to go with a budget that’s as close to a zero mill increase as possible. He noted it’s not within his purview to specify where cuts are made.
Councilman Dumont stated she would like to see student enrollments per school for the last three years. She stated her understanding enrollment is decreasing, and she feels that would have an impact on the budget.
Mr. Greco stated decreasing enrollment only has an impact on the budget if the decrease is happening in the same school and at the same grade. He noted unless they can eliminate a classroom, there’s no economy of scale from a decrease in enrollment. He added they can provide enrollment numbers, however, those numbers are across the district.
Councilman Dumont questioned the status of the class sizes, and Mr. Greco stated they’re comparable to what is seen in other districts and what the State lays out as a guideline. Dr. Gallacher added staff is constantly shuffling to keep a balance.
Dr. Gallacher stated they can provide the strategic school profile, which will show comparability to the State and other schools within the economic reference group. He noted the guideline for class sizes is 25 to 27 at the elementary level. He stated Enfield has some large classes between 25 to 27 students, but the average size is 21 or 22.
Dr. Gallacher stated they are having a significant increase in the number of preschoolers, especially students with special needs.
Councilman Dumont referred to retiring teachers and questioned whether it’s planned to reduce staff through attrition. Mr. Greco stated the plan at this point is to replace the 15 teachers that are retiring.
Councilman Dumont questioned if it’s planned to increase the amount of teachers, and Mr. Greco responded no.
Councilman Lee questioned what the Board would do if they found extra money in their budget, and Mr. Greco responded one of the things on the top of their list is textbooks.
Councilman Lee referred to grants that come into the district that don’t appear to be calculated as a revenue in the area in which they’re designated. Mr. Greco stated they don’t show revenues in their budget.
Councilman Lee stated his impression some of the grants are programmed directly to FTE’s, therefore, FTE’s are being funded twice. He noted it’s very confusing to understand how much revenue it takes to operate the system, programs and operations. He stated his believe it’s almost misleading to see that $71 million dollars funds all these programs when there is supplemental revenue funding a sizeable percentage – about $3 million dollars. Dr. Gallacher stated the majority of the grants should supplement, not supplant, but they’re not double-counting the FTE’s. He noted if that money disappears, the Board will have to come up with the money for the salary paid for out of that grant.
Councilman Lee questioned if a budget doesn’t show expenditures of $74.5 million, but only $71.7 million, how does that get reconciled.
Mr. Drezek stated there’s no guarantee that grant money will come in. He noted if grant money dries up, the program will either dry up, or the Board of Education has to find the additional money within its appropriation to keep things up and running. He pointed out they have to report grant money separate than they do their regular appropriation. He noted this whole process is audited and double-checked by the State. He referred to the personnel detail and the section for certified and non-certified staffing and noted these are not dollar amounts, but rather FTE’s. He stated those are the positions that are funded with the grant money.
Councilman Ragno questioned if the Night Custodian Supervisor and Custodian Supervisor are separate positions. Mr. Arnone stated the Custodian Supervisor is the building supervisor and the Night Custodian Supervisor supervises all buildings at night. Mr. Pongratz explained the Night Custodian Supervisor is on call and would work typically during the day time in the summer season, and he works evenings during the regular school year. He noted this person actually supervises all the custodians, and he would respond to any emergency within the 13 schools.
Councilman Ragno questioned who oversees the Custodian Supervisor, and Mr. Pongratz responded he supervises this position.
Councilman Ragno questioned the hours teachers work according to the contract, and Dr. Gallacher stated the contract calls for a seven and a quarter hour work day. He added they all work more than seven and a quarter hours. He noted he can provide the school calendar which shows the actual time the teachers have to report by level and when their day ends.
Councilman Ragno referred to “Contracted Services” under “Administration and Board Expenses and requested clarification of the figure of $127,900. Mr. Drezek listed the following items that fall under this category:
Mr. Drezek stated the salaries for IT and all IT-related costs are still technically in the Board’s budget, and it’s the same on the Town side. He noted both sides will transfer into the Internal Service Fund.
Councilman Ragno stated his impression that in the grand scheme of things, this budget is pretty much the same status quo. He noted there are many competing interests when trying to put together a Town budget. He noted the Town Manager is very instrumental in trying to produce a very bare bones type of budget, and he commended him for that effort. He stated his belief they could bridge the gap on a lot of things. He noted he’s disturbed that they’re willing to sacrifice new, young teachers to accommodate the largest expenses, which are salaries and benefits. He petitioned the Enfield Teachers’ Association to reopen the contract and provide some concessions so that they can move the educational process forward with technology and supplies.
Councilman Ragno stated he would like to know the number of students attending the magnet schools.
Councilman Kiner questioned where it’s planned to increase fees, and Mr. Greco responded the pre-school partnership programs.
Chairman Kaupin stated over the years there has been very successful integration of services, i.e., Buildings & Grounds and IT. He questioned where else can they go. He noted he has always believed the education system does best when they stick to education because that’s their main focus and that’s where the dollars should be spent. He noted if there is anything in the operational realm that can be pulled out and combined with the Town for economies of scale, they should do that. He questioned whether the Board has had such discussions.
Mr. Kiner stated at present the Audit Committee is broken up into four separate subcommittees, and one of those subcommittees is looking at Facilities and custodians with the idea of possibly co-mingling custodians. He noted it would have to make financial sense. He stated his understanding the Town out sources custodians, however, at this time he couldn’t support such an effort based on what he has heard.
Mr. Arnone stated they have to keep in mind the health, safety and welfare of the children in school buildings. He noted people hear about spinal meningitis, athletic locker room viruses, and flus, and they do not want to lose control of the cleanliness of the schools.
Ms. Apruzzese-Desroches stated the Audit Committee is looking at a variety of things, i.e., outsourcing some services and consolidating some services. She noted they just started looking at these things, and they have a long way to go.
Chairman Kaupin encouraged the Board to look at such ideas.
Chairman Kaupin stated his understanding that about six weeks have passed since the Board put their budget together. He questioned if anything has come up within their budget projections that is different besides the potential liabilities that were mentioned earlier.
Mr. Drezek stated there are no drastic changes, and he feels they’re pretty close to knowing the health insurance costs. He added in conjunction with the Town, they’re in the process of locking in fuel prices. He noted they should have a better understanding of any changes by the April 30th meeting
Dr. Gallacher referred to the flooding event at Enfield High School and stated CIRMA did an excellent job for the Town of Enfield. He stated it’s hoped everything will be back in order by the end of the summer. He added they also appreciate seeing the field work underway.
Chairman Kaupin stated four line items stayed the same as last year’s budget – fuel/gas/oil, water, electricity and telephone. He questioned if the Board feels comfortable with this in light of what’s going on in the world.
Mr. Greco stated they discussed utilities in detail, and they felt a combination of a rate lock on some of the commodities that are purchased, along with not hearing much from Northeast Utilities about them wanting major increases, they could keep these line items the same and still be able to come in at that number.
Chairman Kaupin referred to Special Education Tuition and noted that figure is also the same as last year. He noted on Page 194, “Educational Services Program-Special Education”, there’s a big increase in Occupational and Physical Therapy. He questioned the justification of the tuition remaining the same.
Mr. Greco explained the Special Education Tuition is a combination of children that the school system has to outplace, and it’s a combination of State agency placements that the school system gets billed for. He stated it’s their hope that figure does not change, however, that could change tomorrow if families move into the district with children who have significant needs. He noted if it were necessary to do an out placement, the cost could run to $150,000. He went on to explain the other line items Chairman Kaupin referred to are in-house services they’re providing to existing students with individualized education programs. He pointed out they are seeing an increase in those students, and an increase in the amount and level of services that they need, especially from an occupational therapy and speech and language therapy perspective. He stated occupational therapy services are very difficult to even contract out because there aren’t enough occupational therapists available to deliver the number of services that the school system needs to provide to the students to meet their individualized education program.
Chairman Kaupin referred to Slide #22 and the potential loss of a grant amounting to $100,000 and questioned if that’s been programmed into the budget. Dr. Gallacher stated if that grant disappears, and the school system wants to maintain things, they will have to assume the cost of it.
Chairman Kaupin questioned the Board’s sense about the in-school suspension legislation. Mr. Greco stated based on conversations they’ve had with State legislators and other Superintendents and Board Chairs, they feel the chance of that legislation being repealed is slim to none.
Mrs. Hall stated the proposed legislation this year, which will change what was passed last year, is simply going to change it from going into effect July of this year to January 1, 2009, with defined regulations being set up by the Commissioner of Education. She noted they will not know until October what those regulations will be, and then they’ll have only two months to put it into effect. She feels this is a negative all around. She added if anything is changed at this point, it will not be the requirements but rather the implementation date.
Mr. Arnone pointed out when a student is suspended, the student goes home and gets a day off. He noted that isn’t much of a deterrent. He acknowledged this is an unfunded mandate, however, he doesn’t believe it’s a bad idea.
Chairman Kaupin questioned the possibility of having the in-school suspension served in a different facility. Mrs. Hall noted the Education Committee said it could be in a separate facility, however, she does not see that because it could result in having to bus suspended students from 12 different buildings to one building for up to ten days. She pointed out suspensions do not exceed ten days. She feels it doesn’t make sense to have this outside the school. She noted even having a space for suspended students within a school is a problem because they don’t have storage space right now.
Councilman Ragno referred to Page 190 under Telephone and noted there seems to be a spike leading up to the 2008-2009 budget. Mr. Drezek explained this is something that’s different than what’s been seen in years past in that they’ve included the actual figures in this budget.
Councilman Ragno referred to Page 194 under Student Programs and noted there also seems to be a spike leading up to this budget. Mr. Drezek stated that is actually the true cost of the TLC Program. He noted that program has been implemented in stages. He stated this coming fiscal year will be the first time that they will have all nine programs up and running at the same time, and that is the reason for the dramatic increase.
Councilman Lee questioned if there has yet been a discussion about the figure that will ultimately get transferred to the IT Fund. Mr. Drezek responded that figure is about $948,000 with the exception of employee benefits. Councilman Lee questioned if that includes some of the maintenance contracts for existing software. Dr. Gallacher stated approximately $487,000 is for salaries and $460,000 for operating costs. He noted they can provide a breakdown of all these items.
Councilman Ragno referred to Page 186, “Substitute Teachers”, and noted the actual expense for 2006-2007 was almost three-quarters of a million dollars, and the proposed budget is $567,000. He questioned the year-to-date figure.
Mr. Cooke explained this year they had 20 maternity leaves. He noted a long-term substitute is paid a progressive rate because at a certain point they’re filling the role of the teacher. He stated they didn’t have as many long-term illnesses as they did the previous year.
Ms. Apruzzese-Descroches stated there is a group from the Audit Committee that is exclusively looking at substitute costs and alternative ways of providing substitutes. She noted the committee will either learn the costs are appropriate, or they’ll be able to come up with some suggestions to do things differently and save money.
Councilman Lee stated within the Blum-Shapiro report the Council received last night, there’s a whole section on nutrition services and grants from the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture that he does not see in the book. He questioned if these are additional or separate items.
Mr. Drezek stated there’s one line item in the budget for nutritional services, and that’s the only negative in the budget, and that’s basically a reimbursement from Nutrition Services back to the Board of Education. He noted that’s what they contribute from selling and running the school lunch programs. He pointed out this area is reviewed extensively every year.
Councilman Dumont referred to the 2006-07 budget and noted the school system spent exactly what they budgeted. Mr. Drezek noted that’s not always the case. He noted they are doing things a lot differently than what was done in the past.
There was no Executive Session.
MOTION #9762 by Councilman Jones, seconded by Councilman Ragno to adjourn.
Upon a SHOW-OF-HANDS vote being taken, the Chair declared MOTION #9762 adopted 7-0-0, and the meeting stood adjourned at 8:15 p.m.