Third time's the charm: District 13 budget passes by 213 votes
Posted Tuesday, June 23, 2009 - 7:47pm
Topic Tags: in
Voting for the third time, 1,967 voters in Durham and Middlefield passed District 13 education budget for next year with the smallest raise in anyone's memory -- less than one percent.
The total vote was 1,090 yes, 877 no, which means that slightly fewer people voted this time around (1,981 votes were cast on June 2; 1,802 were cast in the first referendum on May 5).
What was perhaps the most surprising -- and most satisfiying to many -- was that the budget passed in both towns this time around. In the earlier two referendums, the budget had passed narrowly in Durham both times and been defeated in Middlefield. This time, Durham's votes were 746 yes and 544 no, which seemed to the assembled crowd in Korn School waiting for word from Middlefield, perhaps enough to pass no matter what Middlefield's vote was. When the call came, however, it was announced that Middlefield had also approved the budget, though more narrowly -- 344 yes, 333 no.
Superintendent Sue Viccaro said, "I'm just glad it's over and we can move on." The actual budget number voted on included $118,090 worth of cuts after the second defeat, for a gross bottom line of $33.76 million. Because each town pays for its share based on the number of students it sends to district schools, Middlefield's share is expected to carry a lower mill rate with Durham's holding steady though what exactly happens in that regard depends on passage of a state budget with firm figures for aid to education.
Comments :
Yay! Let's all be nicer to
Submitted by happy (not verified) on Tue, 06/23/2009 - 9:21pm.Yay! Let's all be nicer to each other next year, 'kay?
ONLY NUMBERS.
Submitted by trommler. (not verified) on Wed, 06/24/2009 - 1:33pm.So here they are then, the Special Education line items. Line 100- Administration salaries, $216,796 ;Teachers salaries, $1,769,296; Assistants salaries, $1,272,863; Line 320-Educational purchased services, $239,110; Line 430- Properties repairs and maintenance, $0; Line 510- Transportatio, operational services, $621,476; Line 560- Tuition, $1,166,400; Line 610- Supplies, 17,025; Line 640, Books, resource materials, $7,701; Line 739- Equipment, $1,500. Total cost of these items only: $5,312,167. Number of students, 23. ANNUAL COST OF SPECIAL EDUCATION, PER STUDENT, EXCLUDING LINE 100, SUPPORT PERSONNEL SALARIES, LINE 200, EMPLOYEE BENEFITS, LINE 900, DEBT SERVICE, AND BEFORE SPECIAL EDUCATION EXCESS RECEIPTS, IS $230,964.That's two hundred and thirty thousand, nine hundred and sixty four dollars, per student, every year, as far as the eye can see. Thoughtful comments welcomed.
Mandates
Submitted by D13 Dad (not verified) on Thu, 06/25/2009 - 10:36am.Congratulations, you found the 900-lb gorilla that nobody wants to discuss. I have no idea what the BOE can legally do to curb these costs so long as they want to receive federal and/or state matching funds. Someone (maybe a parent with a special ed child?) please correct me if I misunderstand this: Federal IDEA legislation requires that any child with a disability be provided with an individulaized education program. IDEA also established the "Maintenance of Effort" doctrine that essentially dictates local special education spending must be maintained year-to-year if federal funding is used. Therefore, it is virtually impossible to reduce total special ed expenditures unless students leave the district or the district chooses to forego federal funding.
What I do not know is whether D13's special education programs are considerably more expensive (per student) than those of similar districts. If so, then we have really boxed ourselves into a corner, because the perception will be that this district has a premier special education program and parents of children with disabilities will have incentive to move here. If I understand correctly the amount spent per child must be maintained, so in the current situation every new special education student is another non-negotiable $230K in the budget. This may sound cold, but given fiscal realities the town cannot afford this, and it will negatively impact over 2,000 students. If you correct the district's published per-pupil cost to eliminate the special ed numbers, that $230K would support over 20 "regular" kids.
ONLY MORE NUMBERS.
Submitted by trommler (not verified) on Thu, 06/25/2009 - 1:24pm.My taxes are about $7000 for a 30-year old house and a 12-year old vehicle. I suppose I am about average, so, it takes the annual taxes from me and 32 other like families to support the special education of one child for one year. There are 23 such children, so it takes the entire annual taxes of about 759 families of our combined towns to support their special education. Humor me: lets say there are two voters per family. That's about 1518 votes. According to the 2008 Durham Annual Report, only 1270 votes were cast in the Presidential Primary. So the entire annual taxes of those voters interested enough to vote to select US Presidential candidates went to pay for the special education of 23 children, for one year. Next year, we are told, the projected enrollment of children requiring special education will increase to 25. If D13 Dad is correct regarding maintaining rates of expenditure, that means that we already expect our next D13 Budget to have a built-in increase approaching $460,000. Thoughtful comments welcomed.
I cannot believe what I'm
Submitted by yankeefan (not verified) on Thu, 06/25/2009 - 3:03pm.I cannot believe what I'm reading ... I hope and pray that you or any member of your family never experiences the negative opinions - such as yours - when you have a child with a disability. May you always be blessed with "regular' kids.
In the year 2009, I cannot
Submitted by yankeefan (not verified) on Thu, 06/25/2009 - 3:08pm.In the year 2009, I cannot believe what I'm reading - you should apologize to those parents who have a child(ren) with a disability. What a hurtful remark - Aren't you blessed to have a "regular" kid - so are those parents who have children with a disability. What is wrong with you?
OMG - you are a cold and
Submitted by PaulG (not verified) on Thu, 06/25/2009 - 3:11pm.OMG - you are a cold and thoughtless person. I hope you and members of your family never experience the joy a child with a disability brings and then to have someone say something so hurtful. Oh yes, we'll have all the disabled kids at precious rsd13 and they'll run all the "regular" kids out. How do you look at yourself in the mirror?
We were worn down again!
Submitted by Patrick (not verified) on Thu, 06/25/2009 - 10:40pm.Again the D-13 Budget passed by a small percentage of eligible voters. It is time for the abolition of D-13. We need to have the school budget considered as a part of the town budget not seperate. The teacher union won this battle but the war is not over!
Now you see
Submitted by D13 Dad (not verified) on Fri, 06/26/2009 - 9:56am.Now you see why nobody wants to discuss this. I have nothing but respect for parents of children with disabilities, but to dare question the cost of their education I am labeled a cold, unfeeling monster. First of all, the "regular" term is taken right out of the federal IDEA legislation, I mean no disrespect by it. But anyway, I see everyone's too busy attacking me to answer the questions posed. Over 10% of the district's gross budget is currently dedicated to 1% of the student population, and we have ZERO local control over this. What happens if, say, 10 more children are added to this roster next year? How do we deal with an additional $2.3 million? You all saw the fight we had to pass a budget with less than a 1% increase. Am I not correct in stating that this would have a massive impact on the school system as a whole? The point I neglected to make is that if the state & federal government are going to mandate these expenditures, they should be providing funding to support them.
ONLY THE NUMBERS, PLEASE.
Submitted by Trommmler (not verified) on Fri, 06/26/2009 - 11:58am.Yankeefan, who is also PaulG : So far, you are alone in expressing opinions. I have been, and will remain, focussed on the numbers. D13Dad is trying to advance the discussion. Let's try to help me, him and the rest of us think about this matter. Thoughtful comments welcomed.
Thoughtful Comment on Mandate Costs
Submitted by Patrick (not verified) on Sun, 06/28/2009 - 8:34pm.I am shocked and outraged to hear that these so called "mandates" are not actually mandates! A mandate means that there is no choice. If the comments are correct, D-13 can avoid the mandate by not taking Federal funds! We have been lied to all these years! Madates and contractual obligations are all we ever hear from D-13. This all sounds like the "No Child Left Behind" misinformation put out by school districts and the teacher unions. They said that NCLB was a burden and was not funded (funding is a code word for money for increases in teacher salaries) by the Federal government when in fact there was and is no requirement that any public school particiapte in NCLB. The option is up to the school (district/state). If they participate in NCLB they get Federal funds. If they do not participate they don't get Federal money. It would seem to me that D-13 should present an analysis as to the cost of these mandates vs. taking Federal funds. Maybe we could save money by not taking Federal funds and not compliying with mandates. I have no idea. It is outragous that D-13 has never told us this information. These decisions are being made by vested interests and not the citizens who work to pay the tax bill!
MORE NUMBERS.
Submitted by Trommler (not verified) on Mon, 06/29/2009 - 12:09pm.D13 Dad asks whether we may have a premier special education program. I don't know. But he talks about that providing an incentive to move to this District. He's right. Starting from the school year 93-94, the special education population has changed as follows: 9: 9: 19: 12: 9: missing: 16:missing: 22: 16: 16: missing: missing: 15: 26: 23: 23: and 25 projected for school year 10-11. This upward trend is clear. Thoughtful comments welcomed.
NUMBERS
Submitted by TheVillageIdiot (not verified) on Mon, 06/29/2009 - 12:11pm.First off, I want to congratulate “D13 Dad” for having the courage to bring up a touchy subject. It’s a very important one and should be discussed at length. The comments from yankeefan and PaulG were totally uncalled for and extremely harsh. “D13 Dad” didn’t not say anything that was hurtful or harsh to special ed-kids or their parents in anyway, and his comments were quite professional. I totally agree with him that District 13 should NOT be a mecca of special education services since that would soon bankrupt the district, we should only maintain a level of excellence that is equivalent to surrounding towns. This is not my advice but as viewed by state level education officials on the CT state channel CTN. Second, I am not sure if this number of 23 students on the District 13 BOE budget is CORRECT! It seems very low and would question that. I remember either last year or the year before it was this same percentage to regular-ed students and I questioned Amy Emory, who was at that time Spec. Ed . Director, and she said it was a misprint and should have been 200+. I would hate to think they made the same mistake again, but it would definitely affect the per student numbers. According to the new Budget there are 32 Special Education Assistants and 22 special education teachers and 2 special education administrators. That is a total of 56 personal for 23 students – it can’t be ...something doesn’t add up.
HISTORY AND NUMBERS.
Submitted by Trommler (not verified) on Tue, 06/30/2009 - 11:43am.D13 Dad questioned whether we might have a premier special education budget in D13. On the theory that people may vote with their feet, I reviewed the record to see what has developed over the last 17 years. He's on to something: here are the facts. School year 93-94, 9 special education students: 94-95, 9: 95-96, 19: 96-97, 12: 97-98, 9: 98-99, no data: 99-00, 16: 00-01, no data: 01-02, 22: 02-03, 16: 03-04, 16: 04-05, no data: 05-06, no data: 06-07, 15: 07-08, 26: 08-09, 23: 09-10, 23: 10-11 (projected), 25. So in 17 years, we have gone from 9 to 23 special education students, with 2 more projected for next year. Thoughtful comments welcomed.
NUMBERS TALKING.
Submitted by Trommler (not verified) on Thu, 07/02/2009 - 12:55pm.To TheVillageIdiot, the numbers of special education students in D13, per year, have been taken directly from RSD13 Proposed Education Budget compilations, as shown in History and Numbers above. I think we can believe them; they have been reasonably similar each year and at no time were anything near 200 individuals shown for any year. Trying to make the statistics relevant, under the proposed 09-10 budget, the total Special Education budget, broadly speaking, is $5,312,167, and the Net District Budget was $31,796,024. That means that 16.71% of this year's Net District Budget was to go to Special Education students. In other words, if nothing were to change, then every six years, one entire year's worth of the total net education budget of our two towns would be dedicated to funding the special education of 23 students. That's $31,873,002, over six years, for 23 students. Thoughtful comments welcomed.
Truth in facts
Submitted by Anonymous in Middlefield (not verified) on Sat, 07/04/2009 - 6:41am.There are more than twenty-three special education students in District 13.
However, the levels of disability can vary dramatically. Some of these students may have mild speech problems, some of these students may be severely disabled to the point that they need full -time one-on-one assistance. All of these children are factored into the Special Education numbers.
Every child with any form of learning disability is evaluated by a team that, by mandate, determines the best educational process. This could be once a week, one hour of personalized reading instruction. This could be outplacement in a facility that can cost tens of thousands of dollars per year per child.
Our district has championed appropriate education for all. Our district has looked at cost--efficiencies. It can be cheaper to hire an ABA therapist (for autism) in-district than to send the same child to an outplacement (where there is tuition as well as supplies and transportation fees). This is closely monitored.
One should also know that severely disabled students (the most costly) get free public education (by mandate) until age 21.
District 13 costs for special education fall into the average categories.
Yes, costs spiral up for special education in comparison to regular education. Yes, ten percent of the budget goes to special education and these costs are mandated by IEP.
It is in everyone's best interest to educate everyone. Or should we do like the Spartans and leave disabled children out to die?
NUMBERS ARE FACTS.
Submitted by Trommler (not verified) on Mon, 07/06/2009 - 2:13pm.To Anonymous in Middlefield, please. The official, published, RSD13 literature clearly identifies the fact that there are only 23 special education students in RSD13. The RSD13 Proposed Education Budget for 2009-2010 specifies, on Page 7, for "Actual SY 08-09", that 23 students had been enrolled in "Special Ed./Vo-Ag" Grades. This number falls within the range of such students so identified going back to 1994, so it has credibilty. And to repeat, 16.71%, NOT 10%, of this year's Net District Budget, was to go to Special Education students. If nothing were to change, then every six years, one entire year's worth of the total net education budget of our two towns would be dedicated to funding the Special Education of 23 students. That's $31,873,002, over six years, for 23 students. Costs per special education student have indeed "spiralled up". In SY 03-04, they were $134,327, about where they had been since SY 93-94. In SY 06-07, they had reached $233,691. That's about a 75% increase, per special education student, over three years. Please help us advance the discussion. Thoughtful comments welcomed.
False choices
Submitted by Mr. Sanity (not verified) on Mon, 07/06/2009 - 4:11pm."Or should we do like the Spartans and leave disabled children out to die?"
This is a false choice, between the gold-plated service we've been providing or none at all.
The fact is that we've curtailed a great range of opportunities already for the nondisabled students. Nothing should be off the table. Rather than leave the disabled out to die, how about if we cap the town's expense at ten times what is spent on the nondisabled, per student? That seems more than generous to me.
Subcommittee?
Submitted by Steve (not verified) on Tue, 07/07/2009 - 8:41am.Let us ask the Board to establish a subcommittee to study the costs of special ed, and report back to the Board and public in less than 6 months so that this issue can be properly and fairly addressed in the next budget cycle.
NUMBERS PROVOKE THOUGHT.
Submitted by Trommler (not verified) on Tue, 07/07/2009 - 1:57pm.With 22 special education teachers and 23 special education students, it seems that almost every special education student must be receiving the "full-time one- on- one assistance" alluded to by Anonymous in Middlefield, which would imply that they are "severely disabled". We are not told what the other 32 special education assistants do. While a formal cap sounds reasonable, and is a common business practice, ( Durham elderly property tax relief, insurance ) it would be difficult to close the doors half way through the school year as present spending would require..... I'd like to know more about the "outplacement in a facility that can cost tens of thousands of dollars per year per child " that he/she talks about ; if true, since we are already spending 230 thousands of dollars per year per child it would seem that avenue could be at least worth considering. Would you care to elaborate, Anonymous in Middlefield ? Thoughtful comments welcomed.
POETRY IN NUMBERS.
Submitted by Trommler (not verified) on Wed, 07/08/2009 - 1:34pm.That could be the germ of an idea, Steve. Since we already know what the costs are, ( $5,312,167 this year, broadly speaking, for 23 students ), I would only suggest that such a review would be most productive by starting from first principles, some of which have already been identified above. I'm thinking of Kipling's verse " I keep six honest serving men, they taught me all I knew; their names are What and Why and When, and How and Where and Who ". As D13 Dad said, " more expensive ( per student ) than similar districts ", seconded by Mr. Sanity, " nothing should be off the table ", ( What ); Patrick said, " D13 should present an analysis as to the cost of these mandates vs taking Federal funds ", ( Why ); Anonymous in Middlefield said, " outplacement in a facility ", ( How and Where ); The Village Idiot said, " 56 personnel for 23 students", ( Who ); and my contribution would be to get it wrapped up before the holiday season for presentation by Thanksgiving ( When ). Anyone care to volunteer to bring it up at an upcoming BOE meeting ? Thoughtful comments welcomed.
POETRY IN NUMBERS
Submitted by The VillageIdiot (not verified) on Thu, 07/09/2009 - 11:39am.Like I said I already question the one in the know (the Spec. Ed . Director) about these numbers 2 years ago and got a totally different and confusing number. I challenge someone else to speak to that person or to the BOE and get the straight dope - I would be curious what she/they tell someone else. You can try:
Amy Emory D13 Director of Pupil Personnel (860) 349-7208 aemory@rsd13.org
Eida Hinson-Yokubinas D13 Special Education Coordinator (860) 349-7235 eidah@rsd13.org
OFFICIAL NUMBERS.
Submitted by Trommler (not verified) on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 1:11pm.To The VillageIdiot- The numbers are : $31,873,002, over six years, for 23 special education students, covering 56 personnel directly associated with those special education students, reference Numbers Talking, History and Numbers, and Numbers are Facts, above. Thoughtful comments welcomed.
Yankeefan, who is also PaulG
Submitted by Visitor (not verified) on Tue, 07/14/2009 - 11:46am.Yankeefan, who is also PaulG : So far, you are alone in expressing opinions. I have been, and will remain, focussed on the numbers. D13Dad is trying to advance the discussion . Let's try to help me, him and the rest of us think about this matter. Thoughtful comments welcomed.
the big picture
Submitted by Anonymous parent (not verified) on Mon, 07/27/2009 - 8:33pm.I am the parent of a child in D-13 with special needs. I pay taxes just like everyone else. A percentage of those taxes go towards providing your children, regardless of need, with a proper education. Another percentage goes towards some programs my family will never use. That’s part of living in our society.
You may believe that D-13 is spending way too much on special education. I strongly disagree. When comparing D-13’s spend to other districts that also have excellent reputations for special education, you might be surprised.
For the 2007-08 school year, 19% of D-13’s expenditures went towards special education while 12.4% of the student population requires services.
Compare that to some other reputable districts:
Cheshire- 22%, 9.6%
Guilford- 21.6%, 10.6%
Simsbury- 18.2%, 13%
Trumbull- 18.1%, 9.2%
Wallingford- 22.4%, 10.6%
West Hartford- 20%, 11.6%
D-5- 16.5%, 10.5%
D-15- 19.4%, 11.4%
Based on the data, we are very average, one could even argue, above average at maximizing our special education spend compared to the rest of the state.
Have the district legally curb the costs? What kind of comment is that? Let’s legally find a way to not provide services kids need. I find that disturbing.
Those with opposing views use very cold terminology, with comments along the line of it’s just about the numbers. What do you propose we do? Give kids less than what they need? Put them in a class without a one-on-one assistant so the rest of the students are disrupted and not getting what they need? Bus them to another location that is in fact turns out more costly while proven to be less effective? It is an expensive and impossible dilemma, but one that children need.
D-13 is far from a Mecca for special education. You are giving the district too much credit. Just because numbers are going up, doesn’t mean families are running here. Looking back over the 17 years our special education student population grew as Trommler states, you fail to remember a little problem called Autism came to society’s forefront. In the past, these children went undiagnosed and were thought to be underachievers. Populations also grew.
This is not a local issue but a much larger issue. Regardless, we still need to provide children with what they need to succeed in life. Caring for children is not just a financial consideration.
I guarantee that if anybody who disagrees with this opinion actually had a child with special needs, you would immediately change your opinion from a financial view to a whatever the child needs view. You may want to focus on numbers but it’s not always all about numbers! Multiply out some other numbers in the school budget or town budget that you agree with over a number of years and of course it looks like a lot because it is. Your thoughts are not thoughtful, they are wrong, isolating and magnifying a concern of yours because you have no need for it.
Try spending some time with these kids and then tell me we are spending too much!
Let's advance the discussion and look at the big picture. You cannot just focus on numbers. Life does not work that way.
OFFICIAL NUMBERS, AGAIN.
Submitted by Trommler (not verified) on Thu, 07/30/2009 - 4:26pm.To Anonymous parent, please. You are mistaken in stating that 12.4% of the student population requires (Special Education) services. That would amount to about 250 Special Education students. As the official RSD13 Proposed Education Budget for 2009-10 specifies, on Page 7, for "Actual SY 08-09", 23 students had been enrolled in "Special Ed./Vo Ag" Grades. That's about one percent of the student population. Perhaps you could provide the sources and rationale behind all your statistics in a follow-up comment. In the meantime, the fact remains that, if nothing were to change, then every six years, one entire year's worth of our two towns' net education budget will be dedicated to funding the Special Education of 23 students, covering 56 personnel directly associated with those 23 Special Education students.. That's $31,873,002, over six years, for 23 students, reference Numbers Talking, History and Numbers, Numbers are Facts, and Official Numbers, above. Put another way, it takes the entire annual taxes of about 759 families of our combined towns to fund the Special Education of 23 students for one year, reference Only More Numbers, above. Put yet another way, RSD13 spends $230,964, every year, as far as the eye can see, to fund the Special Education of one student, reference Only Numbers, above. Let us indeed advance the discussion: that is what I have advocated from the start. Steve had a good idea, I thought, in Subcommittee? above, although any public sponsor for this emotional subject will require courage and a support group. Anyone care to volunteer to bring it up at an upcoming BOE meeting ? Thoughtful comments welcomed.
repsonse to OFFICIAL NUMBERS, AGAIN.
Submitted by Anonymous user (not verified) on Fri, 07/31/2009 - 11:28am.The numbers and statistics referenced in the big picture post are definitely official and accurate. They come from published data, reported by the district annually, located on the state of CT's department of education web site.
Go to the CT DOE web site. Click on School & District, school & district data, strategic school profiles, view profiles by year, education by district.
For 2007-08, RSD-13 reported PK-12 Students Receiving Special Education Services in District= 270 students or 12.4% of the student population.
The numbers on the powerpoint you reference include students enrolled full time in a special education class with no integration. The numbers in the state data include all students receiving any type of special education services. Therefore the $$ is not dedicated to 23 students.
So, when you incorrectly state that the fact remains all this money and resources go to 23 kids and multiply it out by x amount of years blah, blah, blah… you are wrong. Regardless, even if that were the case, every student deserves and is entitled by both state and federal law to an education. Our district is no different than any other and as stated in the earlier post, RSD-13 is very average in this area.
Now do the math with the updated numbers. It is still high and still absolutely necessary. There is no way to convince anybody who is close to the dilemma differently. How do you propose changing without neglecting the kids? As suggested earlier, go spend some time with kids who require special needs services and then tell me or them we are spending too much for their education.
If you have the answer, stop wasting your time posting here and run to the D.C.! You would put us on the map and I’m sure become a very well compensated consultant for every school district in our country. That is where the conversation needs to go if you really want to advance the discussion.
Post new comment