FAIRFIELD — Officials in the local school district will meet later this week to hopefully finalize a budget after discussion Monday night about why residents rejected an earlier $27.42 million budget and what can be done to make changes.

“I think the three things we need to deal with are the facts of the screw-up that allowed the unbalancing, which no one on the board wanted; the return of the Reading Recovery position; and then the fact we’ll be asking for an increase because we drew down our balance to pay for restructuring,” said School Administrative District 49 board member Kara Kugelmeyer during a special meeting Monday night. “We need to show we have fiduciary responsibility.”

The meeting followed voters’ rejection of a proposed $27.42 million out-of-balance school budget that included greater expenses than it did revenue to fund the spending. SAD 49 includes Albion, Benton, Clinton and Fairfield.

Residents Monday were asked by the board what they saw as the reasons for rejecting the budget.

Several pointed to confusion over the out-of-balance funds and what services would be funded as well as frustration regarding the district’s recent move to buy-out three former administrators for $417,665 as part of a controversial restructuring plan, parts of which have since been reversed.

“I voted ‘no’ for multiple reasons,” said Donna Foster, who said her position as a math interventionist is being eliminated. “One major reason is because of the cuts in regards to interventions for students at the elementary level. I don’t think it’s OK. I think that’s a huge reason, on top of the money being wasted by this board and the superintendent on buy-outs.

“My feeling on that is extreme frustration. I understand that (money) came from this year, but you can’t look at us and say that doesn’t have an impact on next year’s budget. I think there needs to be some give and take. You can’t say ‘We can afford $400,000 and then some,’ but we’re cutting some math interventions and reading interventions.”

From the beginning of the budget process, residents have expressed concerns about potential cuts to the popular Reading Recovery program, which is largely funded by federal Title I grant money.

Superintendent Reza Namin said Monday the district is still putting together its grant application and hasn’t finalized what will and won’t be included, but currently the district is planning on eliminating one of seven Reading Recovery positions in favor of using the Title I funds to run a Pre-K program at Albion Elementary School.

Namin said the board could move to use general funds rather than grant money for the seventh Reading Recovery teacher or choose to fund that instead of the Pre-K program.

He said the math interventionist position has also been eliminated because the position was contingent on federal funds that are no longer available for the coming year.

“The reasons I’ve been hearing from folks are that people are confused,” said Benton resident Elizabeth Ridgeway. “I think if voters and parents are confused, we’re going to keep coming back until we have some clarity as to what services are being provided. I don’t think a lot of questions were answered at the budget meeting, and I think we’re seeing people say ‘Until we know, we’re not comfortable moving forward.'”

Because the budget didn’t pass last week, the two-step referendum process will now be repeated until a budget is adopted. The process includes a district budget meeting followed by a referendum.

At the first budget meeting in May, residents at the suggestion of former school board Chair Steve Grenier moved to add $271,093 into the budget from what the board had recommended.

The change was intended to increase the amount of spending on regular instruction — things such as teacher salaries, books and supplies used by students — by $366,108 and to decrease spending on administration by $95,014.

At the same time, residents failed to raise the amount of money to be collected by taxation to fund the budget, leaving the $271,093 shortfall and setting the board up to make cuts post-public approval.

“We were basically asked to vote on a budget that wasn’t funded,” Fairfield resident Kaitlyn Paulette said Monday. “I felt like that whole piece needed to be revisited.”

Another former school board chair, Stewart Kinley, echoed the messages of other residents Monday night.

“I don’t think people understood the budget or had faith in the board or administration,” he said. “This past year, by your own admission, you spent $417,000 buying out three people. How could a group be so stupid to think if you did away with a person’s job and they had a contract through next year you wouldn’t be liable for their salaries?”

To address the concerns, the board has asked the administration to present to them, prior to Thursday, a staffing analysis showing what positions are budgeted for and what the need is in the schools.

That suggestion came after board Vice Chair Jenny Boyden expressed frustration with 13 unbudgeted positions being added over the course of the 2019 fiscal year.

“It was not identified to the board these were unbudgeted for,” she said. “They were just on the agendas (to be approved).”

Namin acknowledged the board did add 13 positions over the course of the last year that were not budgeted for but said they were only added “when there was a sense of urgency from teachers and principals that ‘We need this now.'”

“If someone can show me these are the staff needed to support our students, that is the analysis I need to see before I can get behind a budget,” Boyden said.

The board is scheduled to take up the budget again Thursday. Some members said that, in conjunction with looking at the staffing analysis, they will seek to trim about $200,000 from the $27.42 million budget.

“I want to obviously say I don’t want to cut things, but I feel like the fiduciary responsibility is huge here,” Kugelmeyer said. “Even if we weren’t in favor of the restructuring, we have to make good of the fact many people in this district are on fixed incomes, and the lack of planning that happened speaks volumes to people in that way.”

If the budget is finalized Thursday, the district is tentatively planning on a budget meeting July 9 followed by a referendum July 23.

The cost of holding a referendum is about $12,000, according to Finance Director Tara Thompson.

Related Stories