There is a sense among some in Durham, Lee and Madbury that the Oyster River School District budget is out of control.
That sentiment may have been among the reasons four-term School Board Member David Taylor lost handily during March 9 balloting. Regardless, it was the motivation for a recent meeting between Durham town officials and school district representatives.
Leading up to March balloting, ORSD voters complained that while district enrollment has declined, budgets continue to rise.
Right or wrong, the criticism of Taylor was that he promoted that disparity by failing to oppose much in the way of added spending.
The result was a voter backlash that saw Ann Wright more than double Taylor's vote tally — 1,249 to 605 — with Krista Butts recording a strong total of her own at 1,064.
The burden the Oyster River School District puts on taxpayers is nothing new. Several years ago, one candidate for re-election to the board boasted the district spent well above the state average on a per-pupil basis.
At the time, the state average was approximately $9,000 while Oyster River was spending $12,000 — a third higher than the state average. Fall enrollment for that year was reported at 2,085.
Not only did the candidate boast about the added spending, but she bragged that Oyster River was actually spending closer to $16,000 per student (although no explanation for the higher number was offered).
And guess what happened on election day?
She was re-elected.
As of the 2008-09 school year the statewide per-pupil average, by district, was $11,745.55. Oyster River clocked in at $15,573.92 — again about one-third higher and still well ahead of most other districts. Fall enrollment for ORSD was 2,044.
While financial numbers for the 2009-2010 won't be ready for awhile, fall enrollment was reported at 2,029 — another decline.
If voters have chartered a new course for the Oyster River School District with the election of Wright and Butts, it will take awhile to materialize. The disparity between the Oyster River School District budget and what districts of comparable size and quality spend did not come about overnight. Neither did the misconception that spending more money always means quality, as pointed out by Roger W. Speidel on the Oyster River Community Resource website before the election.
Speidel compared 10-year windows of the Bow and Oyster River School Districts to make his point that money doesn't necessarily buy quality.
That 10-year window may be an indication of the challenge Oyster River has in bringing its budget more in line with the thinking of those who elected Wright and Butts. One election will not do the job.
n n n
As for the recent meeting between ORSD representatives and town officials, it is only speculation that such meetings can help quell voter discontent with school finances.
This isn't the first time town officials have been on the receiving end of complaints about school spending. But the bottom line is that town and school are legally separate entities. One has no authority over the other.
That said, there are myriad reasons for them to cooperate in spending tax dollars.
Hopefully, they can do so on an ongoing basis rather than in the fits and spurts.
And who might the female incumbant be who bragged about Oyster River spending $7000 more than the state average per pupil? Most likely our dear senior experienced board member JoAnn Portalupi (note the sarcasm). Now it will be hard to bring the spending under control without allowing our children to suffer.
ReplyDeletePlease. Stop with the battle cry of "children suffering" when school budgets are discussed. I graduated from OR in 1998, the student population has decreased steadily since, yet the budget continues to climb.
ReplyDeleteThere is not a revenue problem, there is a spending problem.
Don't assume that it was JoAnn who made the comments. There are other women who have been on the board and probably made similar comments. Unless you know for a fact, don't mention any name. Failure to heed that advice will make you a libeler.
ReplyDeleteJoAnn is the only woman to be re-elect to the board in the last few years. who else could it be then?
ReplyDeleteJoAnn is the only woman to run and be re-elected in the last few years, so who else would you suggest it could be?
ReplyDeleteI suggest everyone look at the video posted on this blog about the discussion on the Durham resolution. At the end of the video, Todd Selig (Durham Town administrator) talks about why the council and residents are getting frustrated. It sums up a lot of what is posted on this blog in about 5 minutes. Perhaps after that, people will understand.
ReplyDeleteAs for the children suffering, that is a load of BS. I would like to see the administration look at Bow or Hanover and compare category for category why our costs are so much higher? Is it salary, physical buildings, utilities, etc? There MUST be a reason that we can all agree on and understand.
I think that the historical increases over the past 10 years are horrendous. There was a period when they were in the double digits!!! Now, it's much better but we have gone through a period where the budget increases were so bad, it's hard to decrease them. I don't know what we can do at this point but all I want is an answer and what it would take to decrease spending.
From what I've read and recent info that has come out (re: the auditor comments), I think that we throw money away operationally and don't care for process or documentation. Perhaps if we started pinching pennies, we could save some substantial amounts of money.
For the networking "fiasco" that started in 2008, what would bids have looked like if we shopped around the price? Would we have saved anything? What about our Aramark contract? What if we outsourced to another company? Do people even know that our Aramark representative who works here full time actually SIGNS purchasing orders? This person is not even an employee of ORCSD and he is signing our money away to other vendors.
In any case, there MUST be reasoning to why we have one of the largest budgets in the state but our educational achievements are not proportional to the budget. Why do other districts spend a lot less for the same results?
My understanding is that 80% of our budget is in salaries. The district is just going to have to be more frugal when negotiating in the future. The days of writing blank checks, unfortunately for the employees, must end. There are too many residents who are losing their jobs or having their hours reduced to save their companies. People just can't afford to continue in the direction the board has been taking us in the last ten years. Oyster River already has a reputation for high taxes. If we lose the reputation for good schools, our property values are going to suffer. It will hurt everyone, not only the families with children.
ReplyDeleteSomeone should go back and research who exactly was on the committees that negotiated the current contracts. That could be very interesting information. I won't mention any names, for fear of libel accusations, but I think many people will be able to connect the dots. This is in the public record.
ReplyDeleteSomeone should go back and research who exactly was on the committees that negotiated the current contracts. That could be very interesting reading. I won't mention any names, for fear of libel accusations, but I think many people will be able to connect the dots. And this is in the public record.
ReplyDeleteTen years of over spending.
ReplyDeleteA "senior" board member who is entering her ninth year of service.
Is there a pattern here?
Just thinking...
previous poster:
ReplyDeleteenough with the negativity. It is not wanted nor is it constructive.
several posters back regarding negotiations:
ReplyDeleteI don't like what you are insuating. It appears you think the district gave away the farm. Nothing could be further from the truth. Over the last few contracts - spanning over 10 years - the employees (at all levels) continue to pay more towards their health insurance and other benefits to help lessen the burden on taxpayers.
Please keep in mind that in addition to board members, there are others at the table including a lawyer for the district and the superintendent. No contract is passed without the approval of school board and the voters.
The school district spends about 3/4 of its budget on staff salaries and benefits. That is true (give or take a few percentage points). But that is true of any organization, business or other school district. Hiring employees is a hefty expense no doubt about it. But Oyster River is not out of whack from any others.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the district has been writing blank checks. Salaries in the ORCSD were once 2nd and/or 3rd in the state under Hanover (which pays their staff significantly more than us). Now we are well beyond 10th in the state.
I often hear business people say that if you want good employees, you do have to pay them a good wage. We don't have to break the bank but it is true. We could probably stay where we are (10th or so) and maintain good teachers, staff, and administrators.
Certainly we won't be providing huge bonuses for anyone (nor little ones) like they do in the corporate world but we do need to make sure we remain competitive in the region. It doesn't help that the Seacoast has some of the highest costs of living in the state (and New England for that matter).
Good points above but then why the huge budget? What is the public missing? I agree that teachers pay more and more into healthcare year after year but so do employees of public/private companies. In addition to that, these employees are fearful of layoffs every quarter, get benefits taken away, pay freezes, unpaid time off mandates, and sometimes reductions in pay in lieu of a layoff.
ReplyDeleteSo, people are feeling it from every place...not just teachers that are paying more in healthcare.
However, aside from the teacher pay argument, which I think has no merit. It is a moot point as there are contracts in place and I DON'T want to end up like Portsmouth where there is public uproar at the teachers NOT agreeing to a pay freeze. That would be disastrous in ORCSD with what's going on now.
I want to focus on why other districts with similar pay structures have smaller budgets. Would it be our buildings? Are they expensive to maintain and run? Do we spend too much operationally on certain things? Do we have inefficient bus routes?
There must be something the administration can point to to answer why enrollment goes down and budgets keep increasing? Why? Why? Why?
I think I'd trust the old board to negotiate fair contracts more than I would a person who bankrupted a company in California.
ReplyDeleteI won't mention any names but there is currently one on the board.
Hey...wasn't Jim Gaard on the board during all those budget increases? That guy hired all those corrupt Tyco employees. As for the CA company...stop pursuing those lies. What have YOU to gain by that? CA has a whole other set of issues aside from NH school funding. Bankruptcy in CA is like refinancing in NH.
ReplyDeleteSure, I get it. salaries are 2/3 of the budget, and the other 1/3 is about $10m or the same as Durham's budget.
ReplyDeleteThe budget process is a real joke. Someone on the Board said they had a more open process this year. I took one look at that budget and decided it was not worth my time. I could not make heads or tails of it. Why I am going to waste my time making a fool of myself trying to fight something I can't read?
The farm is gone. This is no longer a public school--this is the Howard school. The TIP was voted DOWN. You can analyze it nine ways to Sunday and the answer was no. Did that stop them? Nope. It's a real shame. Now we see seniors coming out and taking a stand. These are new faces and still it seems to make no difference to these folks.
As for the insurance comment, I ask, where do you live? What do you think is happening in everyone else's jobs. We all pay more for health insurance and co-pays and medications. Many people I know have seen pay decreases or lay offs on top of increased health insurance costs. This will be the way of the world for a number of years to come, I'm afraid.
It is unfortunate and if the people in charge would stop giving away the farm (new trucks, security cameras, hundreds of new computers, technology that the board said the teachers did not want) then maybe teachers would not have to be so heavy hit.
The teachers should be angry that all this stuff seems to be more important then those people they put out of work. The Board needs to step up and do the tough job for the people and for the teachers and get these crazy spenders in line. $1.2M surplus last year and guess what, no one seems to know where it all went. Even the town of Durham is interested now.
Do you know how much that $1.2M could have covered for the health insurance increases? You do the math.
As a teacher, I want that technology. I don't know who the previous poster feels doesn't want it but to me, your arguments are full of malarky.
ReplyDeleteWe expect our children to be up to date on new technology so they can compete with those who are applying to the same colleges.
Without the tech, I can see the college admissions officer now: "So there is a HS senior from this modern, progressive school in whatevertown who is up to date with the latest technology and engineer skills. And then there is this Oyster River senior who knows how to use a slide rule and an abacus." Which would you pick?
As a teacher, I want that technology. I don't know who the previous poster feels doesn't want it but to me, your arguments are full of malarky.
ReplyDeleteWe expect our children to be up to date on new technology so they can compete with those who are applying to the same colleges.
Without the tech, I can see the college admissions officer now: "So there is a HS senior from this modern, progressive school in whatevertown who is up to date with the latest technology and engineer skills. And then there is this Oyster River senior who knows how to use a slide rule and an abacus." Which would you pick?
Technology at what expense though? I would rather send our kids out there well rounded and book smart vs. knowing how to read from a Kindle or iPad. How about kids learning Powerpoint in elementary school? That is ridiculous! Let's focus on the core essentials. by the time those kids are in HS, Powerpoint will be obsolete!
ReplyDeleteI also don't like this talk about introducing Chinese into the language program. Shouldn't we focus more on Latin and the romance languages? There was a push in the 80s to learn Japanese because Japan was going to take over the world. Sound familiar with China? In any case, how is Toyota treating you these days?
While I have tremendous respect for China, I don't think learning Chinese is going to be a HARD requirement in the global economy. It is short sided thinking IMO.
Technology needs to be a real discussion. Elementary teachers said to the Chair and Vice Chair that we did not need laptops, smart boards and projectors. Shouldn't we invest those resources in the high school where they will be better utilized? When will the teachers be part of these discussions?
ReplyDeleteBankruptcy in California is the EXACT same as NH as it is federal law, not state law.
ReplyDeleteThat company in California went bankrupt because they couldn't pay their bills. Simple as that. Do we really want to hear the rhetoric from an anti-tax board member who went bankrupt and put who-knows-how-many people out of work?
Are people asleep at the wheel?
ReplyDeleteI just watched the Board meeting and was aghast when watching the CPA firm present their findings. Do you have any idea what this means?
I can only assume that the firm required the district to conduct a formal presentation to the Board because the findings are extreme. Clearly for those of you without a CPA, you may not know the significance of the #1 finding.
Let me attempt to explain and I can only hope that you see how extreme and serious this situation is for the district.
An annual CPA audit is conducted and is not designed to detect fraud. The primary purpose is to review financial statements in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the U.S. The audit does not set out to form an opinion regarding the effectiveness of internal controls.
Do you see why item #1 is so significant? The internal controls are so negligent and non-compliant that for the past 2 years, our district is considered to have SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY. As a result, recommendations have been made to tighten our internal controls in multiple areas.
In the scope of this audit, this is not a forensic audit, but this is an unmitigated failing on the part of our district. Simply put, the firm ran a control test and the district failed significantly.
The district should take this very seriously and consider rapid measures to respond to this crisis:
*a forensic audit should be considered to determine if fraud has been committed (3 invoices from vendors out of 25 in the test were not located; at a minimum, negligence puts the district at risk for fraud; the failure rate indicates that fraud is a significant possibility)
*new internal fiscal controls and process (developed by an expert from outside of the district with no connection to the school or even the community to be sure there is no bias)
*retraining all staff who deal with receivables and payables on this newly developed system
I want to know why we bought a brand spankin new Chevy Silverado last year!?!?!??!?!? What the hell are these people doing with our money?
ReplyDeleteI remember sitting through a school board meeting last year where several people - business administrator, head of maintenance (at the time) and others who had a proposal for the board. They had nothing to hide and there was a lengthy discussion on the issue.
ReplyDeleteThe proposal was to purchase a new pickup w/ a plow and sander. Why was this important? The one truck they had was something like 12 years old, the frame of the pickup was broken not one but twice. Both breaks required welding and outside autobody specialists recommended the district stop using the truck for heavy duty work. One more break and it would have been toast forever.
At the time, with a winter season imminent, the district needed a vehicle to plow six buildings' parking lots and sand/salt them - something the old truck could no longer do.
The district went and priced out a new vehicle at several different dealerships and found exactly what they were looking for. They had several bids (plus the state bid which municipalities and school districts can also purchase from) which guaranteed OR the best possible price.
The board discussed this thoroughly and left no stone unturned. I have no doubt that there was no funny business with this. To insinuate that there was without knowing the facts is just plain wrong on so many levels.
It is a little ridiculous to think that the district will never have to spend money on anything. I'm all for being responsible with spending & trying to keep spending on items that impact students directly. But, we have a lot of property to maintain. It seems that they did a pretty good job in keeping the old truck for 12 years. Sometimes things just have to be replaced. As long as they follow apprpriate bidding procedures, it seems fine to me. Let's be reasonable here. How many of us drive cars that are 12 years old?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous above seems to be very well-versed on the subject of the District's purchase of a truck to plow roads. Perhaps he would be so kind as to inform the rest of us as to when this issue was discussed, so that we can review the meeting minutes rather than relying on his interpretation of what happened. I myself either attend or watch most school board meetings and I don't remember any such discussion, but perhaps I missed it.
ReplyDeletePerhaps someone can also explain why we have a line item in the budget each year for plowing and sanding services. Since we own our own truck (and have for years) why are we also paying someone else?
And just as a matter of record, I do drive a 12 year old car (though to be fair, I don't plow snow with it).