FY17 School Budget Update

Well, it is that time of year again and May/June brings another annual School Budget review and vote. Here's my take, with a veritable treasure trove of linked documents.

You can see a complete copy of the FY17 School budget HERE. You can find additional support documentation on this page posted by Superintendent Reese. You can see the Superintendent's PPT initial budget presentation to the School Committee HERE.

The total School budget request for FY17 is $29,669,627. This is up $712,129 from FY16 (or, 2.46%). The School budget represents 51.8% of the overall General city budget (excluding Water and Sewer enterprise fund budgets). The School budget consistently represents over half of the city's operating budget.

Here's my nickel summary: due to a confluence of budget dynamics unique to this year, the School Committee was able to approve a budget that both grew at a lower amount than recent years and made incremental improvements/additions to staffing and programming.We still have a long ways to go to achieve the levels of programming and smaller classroom sizes from the last decade, but this budget at least represents a (quite) modest step forward.

First, what helped with this year's 'windfall' of cost savings? A few things. First and foremost, there are 13 retirements at the end of this school year. All of the positions will be replaced, but almost by definition, the replacements will come in at lower salaries. We also have some special education students returning to the district from costly out-placements, other out-placement special education students who have been re-assigned to other school districts, some student's 'aging out' of out-placements, and increased retention of special education students in-district (cost avoidance). The combination of savings in salary and savings in out-of-district placements 'freed up' funds to be re-directed to new positions or increased hours for other positions. This positive 'perfect storm' will likely NOT repeat next year; by comparison, we only have 3 retirements coming next year.

What was ADDED to the budget, over the current year? You can see the full list HERE of what was added. Here are my highlights, with AMS receiving the most new benefit:

• Cashman: increased Pre-K/K staffing (18 hrs/week) and increased clerical support
• AES: 1.0 FTE SPED teacher, increased clerical support
• AMS: 1.0 FTE 'EAST' teacher (English/Arts/Science Technology); 1.0 FTE SPED teacher. 0.5 of a new 1.0 FTE Adjustment Counselor, shared with High School
• AHS: 0.5 Adjustment Counselor (shared with AMS); 1.0 FTE Science/Tech teacher; 2 PT library aides
• Amesbury Innovation High School: increased SPED paraprofessional support
• Central Office: Increased clerical support to Superintendent

In a meeting that I had with Dr. Reese last week, he could assure me that with the staff additions at AMS, the Middle School will not face the threat of recent years of failing to make its 'time on learning' requirements for the Commonwealth.

Sounds positive! Any other good news? A number of fees will be going down. Per student Athletics fees will be going down by $65, to $285. Co-curriculur activity fees will be going down by $30, to $50 per student. Family cap will be going down by $300, to $900. Bus fees will be dropping significantly, from $360 to $250, with the family cap at $450.

OK, any bad news? More a cautionary note but the gains in this year's budget will be challenging to repeat in FY18, since it is unlikely that we'll see the kind of one-time cost savings that it looks like we'll have for FY17. The challenges for ELL (English Language Learner) students at Cashman will continue. For next year, we'll have 1.0 FTE teaching a cohort that includes students with at last 30 different native languages, which is half that staffing recommended by the Commonwealth. Enrollment figures continue to show an upward trend in percent of students with special needs, this year topping 20% of our student population. Average classroom size at Cashman for Grades 2-4 will be 23-24. Most of the additions to staffing are not within mainstream curriculum offerings (with the exception of the two EAST teachers at AMS & AHS). The district dropped from having 3 of 4 schools at 'Level 1' to only having one school at 'Level 1', using this metric from the Commonwealth.

Finally, the district continues to chase its tail to an extent in regards to capital investment in educational technology. In the very near future, the district will have to meet steep demands for having technology in place that can handle required testing and this on top of the use of computer resources for day-to-day educational purposes. This means having enough units, adequate bandwidth and wireless access, and networking switching capacity to handle the volume. You can read the districts 5 year technology capital plan HERE. Read more about projected enrollment and class sizes HERE.

What else? The Innovation High School may be running into a jam with its facility. Currently, the district rents a building from All Saints Anglican Church (by the City Hall/Police Department rotary) but that lease is running up and the church is asking for an increase. They are currently there on a month-to-month lease basis only. There are no likely changes on the horizon for foreign language and arts offerings. Roof work at the Middle School is on this year's capital improvement plan; similar work needed at Cashman is slated for FY18 (you can read the current Capital Improvement Plan HERE). We continue to have a problem with attrition, especially around 9th and 10th grades, with substantial numbers of families opting to send their children to other schools (including Whittier Tech). We average about 70 students a year leaving our high school. That represents over 10% annual loss of enrollment and not because our population is shrinking but because students are opting to study elsewhere. Competition remains a real issue, especially with St. John's Prep in Danvers having recently expanded into offering Middle School education.

Summary - So, this is a good budget in the sense that it does not take steps backward. I applaud Dr. Reese and the School Committee for taking a more strategic approach than even last year. This year, they explicitly did NOT simply fund the top 1 or 2 priorities at each building but rather focused resources where it seemed the most benefit would be gained, which meant directing more resources to AMS and AHS than to other buildings. This will hopefully prevent some expensive out-of-district special education placements and might help with our attrition problems, but that remains to be seen.