From the BCCT
Imagine the craigslist posting: Larger sized school district, once stunningly beautiful but now a little over the hill, seeks merger with smaller district for mutual survival.
The above is posted with tongue firmly in cheek. A merger is always something to explore but let's keep in mind that the current economic problems, as hard as they are, are only temporary. Take a few moments to have your Chicken-Little-the-sky-is-falling-and-we're-all-doomed spasm, and then get back to work.
Morrisville did not have the fortitude to make the hard choices back in the 1970s and 80s as economic conditions deteriorated slowly, and the frog boiled alive. The rapid downturn today is alarming and is the equivalent of being cast in boiling water. Now on alert, it's time to make the changes needed.
A side question to all the Pennsbury Pac-Man strategy proponents: You really want Morrisville to be absorbed into another school district who is at the equivalent position of 1990s Morrisville? Is Morrisville going to close the Pennsbury budget gap by selling our students for enough money to cover the extra costs of education as well as the $12 million needed to close the gap? We would sell our independence to gain what exactly?
We do not take any pleasure in the tough times and anyone else's miseries, and Pennsbury is in a tough spot. Let's keep merger-mania in clear focus. Ask the tough question if a merger is helpful or not.
District services on the chopping block
By: MANASEE WAGH
Bucks County Courier Times
It's either a tax hike or whittling down services.
That's the difficult choice for Pennsbury.
The school district faces a $12 million budget shortfall, and the board has voted to keep any tax increase at or below the state mandated Act 1 limit of 4.1 percent. Pennsbury can't afford to keep a tax increase as close to zero as possible without cutting back on some programs and services, said CEO Paul Long at Thursday's board meeting that lasted till midnight as angry residents protested possible losses in educational programs.
About 26 percent of Pennsbury households have children in the public schools, according to district figures.
Board members spent a great deal of time discussing how to handle the administration's suggestions and engaged in a brief discussion with each resident during the public comment portion of the meeting.
Part of the deficit stems from a shortage of federal and state funds, despite the federal stimulus funding, said Isabel Miller, the district business administrator.
"The tricky part is preserving the central education process while saving money in the budget," said Long. To that end, the administration is evaluating every school and department, seeking ways to eliminate a myriad of large and small expenses.
Possible changes in the coming year include:
?? Making the bus transportation system more efficient;
?? Staff reductions in all job classifications;
?? Larger class sizes;
???Raising minimum enrollment for some courses;
?? Restructuring, alternatively funding or eliminating specific courses and programs, including Extra K, secondary gifted classes and business cooperative education;
??Keeping more special education services within the district;
???A moratorium on some field trips that could be replaced by video conferencing;
??Eliminating some district assessments for one to two years.
These are some of the many options administrators suggested. They stressed their ideas are a work in progress. The administration's goal is to maintain educational excellence despite any changes, they said.
Lower Makefield resident Robin Stelly said students are facing diminished educational opportunities. She doesn't think the proposed measures would fill the financial hole.
"I'd rather pay higher taxes," she said.
The item of the most concern to residents at the meeting is the prospect of losing programs and lowering elective course requirements.
Parents are concerned the district is considering allowing seniors to drop courses if they have proficient or advanced PSSA scores and sufficient credit to graduate - at least 27 in prescribed subject areas. In that case, they could drop up to one elective course per semester, allowing them to come to school late or leave early. The high school could combine smaller elective classes into larger ones that way.
"Kids shouldn't be out early or sleeping in. I think it's a very bad idea for students not to have a full day, including electives," said Barbara Joseph, the parent of a Pennsbury High School student.
She said if fewer students opt to take arts electives, those courses eventually would be cut.
One program that could be eliminated is Odyssey of the Mind, a creative problem-solving competition in which Pennsbury students have reached the international round. The district would save about $9,000 annually, said district officials, but the program is mostly paid for and run by parents.
Board members suggested helping parents find alternate sponsorship from local businesses.
District parents also pointed to other ways the district could cut costs, including minimizing administrative and board conferences and significantly reducing paper and printing costs incurred through newsletter and flier mailings.
While the board took no action, it will continue hashing out alternatives and maybe modifying suggestions.
"I agree that if we cut programs then we won't have as excellent an education as before. But we have to take finances into consideration," said board member Howard Goldberg. "I encourage people to keep coming out and pointing out ways to cut costs.''
A detailed description of options is available on the Pennsbury School District Web site at www.pennsbury.k12.pa.us
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
"The school district faces a $12 million budget shortfall, and the board has voted to keep any tax increase at or below the state mandated Act 1 limit of 4.1 percent."
That's precisely why, in my opinion, it's a bit foolish for school boards to pass these OPTIONAL "we'll keep the tax increase under 4.1%" resolutions. They might sound great to a taxpayer's ear but, as the saying goes, "the devil's in the details".
I'm not saying Act 1 is great, and I don't want my taxes to go up any more than the next guy, but Act 1 doesn't require these resolutions, and it allows districts to apply for certain exceptions to the 4.1% cap (e.g. Special Ed. funding).
The deadlines for passing these resolutions seem to be in January, when next school year's budget picture, as well as the overall economic picture, are still cloudy. Final budgets aren't due until June. As we are now experiencing, things can change rapidly, and these resolutions limit flexibility and tie a board's hands going in.
I think boards can exert fiscal discipline without these resolutions, and without putting districts into major binds and in the position of forcing deep cutting of educational programs if/when circumstances change.
Post a Comment