Scarsdale 2012-13 School Budget: Too Little or Too Much?

In a two-hour presentation on March 5, the Scarsdale Board of Education presented their proposed 2012-13 budget for the Scarsdale Schools, which avoids any cuts in the educational program and comes in below the mandated cap. The $141,634,884 budget is 2.3% higher than the 2011-12 budget and translates to a 3.81% tax increase for Scarsdale residents and 2.64% for those in the Mamaroneck strip. The district was able to propose this very modest increase due to several factors:

1) This year the district spent less than anticipated as a result of more teacher retirements than expected, fewer long term faculty leaves, energy cost savings of $765,000 as a result of the warm winter and savings in health care costs. A projected surplus of $6,195,354 from the 2011-12 budget will be used to fund the 2012-13 budget.

2) Next year costs are projected to go down as enrollment in the elementary schools is expected to decrease. The district will enroll 60 fewer students and the number of elementary school sections will drop by five, decreasing from 113 to 108 classes. Therefore, five fewer elementary school teachers will be needed. This is the fifth year in a row that elementary school enrollment has dropped.

3) Following lengthy discussions, the Board also decided to reduce fund balances for electricity and health insurance resulting in an additional $500,000 in revenues for 2012-13.

Despite economic pressure, the Board was able to maintain class sizes of 22 students in grades K-3 and 24 students in grades 4-5 and to retain the third assistant principal position at the high school. Two unassigned teaching positions are now in the budget to be used to staff classes where needed, depending on enrollment and class selection.

What’s New?

The budget includes $1.92 million for plant improvements, a budget line that was severely cut in the past few years. The funds will be used for required repairs and safety upgrades as well as the transformation of the auto shop at the high school into an internet café and satellite cafeteria to relieve crowding in the high school cafeteria. Also under consideration is the expansion of the fitness center at the high school, an item that has been under consideration since 2008.

In the transportation budget $205,000 has been allotted for two new large school buses and two smaller vans that will be purchased to replace equipment that is beyond repair. 1,900 of the district’s 4,700 students live more than 1.5 miles from their schools and use the buses for transportation.

A new Center for Innovation will be formed to explore how technology can transform instruction. The $100,000 in start-up funding will be allocated for project proposals, consultants, speakers, conferences and site visits.

Board President Jill Spieler reiterated that Scarsdale has managed to hold the line on costs without compromising the Scarsdale education. Last year, 99% of Scarsdale graduates went to college and of those, 95% attend four-year colleges and 62% enrolled at the most selective colleges and universities in the country. She asked the community to provide feedback on the budget by email to boardofed@scarsdaleschools.org or by attending the next Board meeting scheduled for March 19. The complete budget document can be reviewed on the School Board website at http://scarsdaleschools.org/Page/17

Last, she reminded everyone to exercise their right to vote on Tuesday May 15th.

Despite what appeared to be a reasonable compromise between economic and educational concerns, some still voiced reservations about the budget.

Speaking on behalf of the PTA Executive Board, President Vivienne Braun reiterated her concern about class sizes at the high school and asked the Board to plan for the future and hire more teachers for the older students. Citing the lost of 8 full time teachers at the high school since 2008 she said that classes are larger and teachers have less time to spend with individual students. In response to the Board’s offer to hire teachers in the summer, she said, “how can we hire at the last minute?”

Both Spieler and McGill resassured her that they have looked into the issue and will continue to monitor class sizes as students select courses for next year. Spieler contended that only 9.4% of high school classes now have more than 25 students, in line with historic norms. She added that hiring more teachers to reduce class sizes at the high school would be a policy decision.

Members of the Coalition for Scarsdale Schools also had concerns about the Board’s proposed budget which is more than $1 million less than the original budget proposed by Dr. McGill. They took issue with the decision to wean the district off funding operating expenses with surpluses from previous years. Speaking about the Board’s move to reduce planned surpluses, Art Rublin said, “The Boards current proposal for reductions in planned surplus and the health care and utility lines would contribute to a revenue deficit of $2.4 million” at this time next year. He presented a rollover analysis demonstrating the long term affect of reducing the surplus by $500,000 per year and warned that the plan would produce “revenue holes” and eliminate the Board’s ability to hedge against “future mandates. pension and health insurance growth, a difficult economy, inflation and state politics.”

Jim Dugan, also of the Coalition for Scarsdale Schools seconded Rublin’s comments and said that complying with the tax cap this year “sets a dangerous precedent.” He feared that “in the future, coming in under the cap will trump other concerns and weaken our ability to attract young families to the community.”

Speaking last, Miriam Pop Seely said the tax cap “is the gorilla in the room that you can’t ignore. If we come in under the cap this year, we’re setting ourselves up for failure in the future.” She urged the Board to use the surplus next year rather than this year. Referring to the Board’s decision to comply with the cap, she added, “ It’s my fear to such an extent that I am already looking at private schools.”

Spieler promised to review the rollover analysis and answered that the surplus had grown in the past few years and the Board had moved to level it out and reduce reliance on the surplus to fund operating expenses.