Are We Doing Everything We Can?

To the Editor:

Last week, I wrote that I was asking myself many questions relating to the reversal of the BOE’s commitment (not sure what one calls a promise to promise?) to fund full-day kindergarten and same services. If the BOE needed funds to enable the implementation of a program, why didn’t they ask for it? Isn’t there is a mechanism in place that would allow a “special appropriation of funds” due to an unforeseen event?

Another question, with two more mediations on the horizon — as stated in the meeting on July 19 — why would the BOE spend what excess money remained on a staff hire, after arriving at what they called same services? Shouldn’t we wait until we knew what additional costs we would face from those two situations? Are we now going to find that additional cuts are required? Are there other monies in the budget to offset this? Wait, no, that can’t be because not having money to offset the $120,000 additional cost just revealed was the sole reason for not moving ahead with full-day kindergarten... very confusing. Granted, I still have a lot to learn but it doesn’t seem to add up.

I also continue to ask why the BOE did not attempt to educate the public on why costs were still rising with enrollment declining. This seemed the number one reason why folks rejected the first budget. It was mentioned before the first referendum by voters and elected officials from the Board of Finance to the Legislative Council. The BOE certainly had the data to defend this — it was all in the budget. Unfunded mandates, staff raises, technology upgrades, and the rising cost of special education are among the reasons.

As for the rising cost of special education, specific line items in the budget pages 25–27 (and there may be more) detail the percent over last year we plan to spend. I suppose that doesn’t include the recent discovered costs ($280,000 disclosed back in May and $120,000 disclosed on July 18) again, because if they were part of the budget already Chairperson Leidlein would not be naming that as a reason to not fulfill her “promise to promise” before the vote.

In their statements supporting full-day kindergarten, the elementary school principals discussed the positive effect FDK would have not only on building a stronger foundation for later learning, but also on the ability to differentiate and identify children at risk thus potentially reducing remediation or special dducation costs. On March 6, one principal provided more detail, stating he had 27/105 first graders and 21/95 second graders currently receiving “Tier 2” or higher support with 13 and 11 “Included Children” respectively.

Are we doing everything we can to address the needs of our youngest? If there is a mechanism in place to get the funds, why not use it? BOE: Why not make good on your promise to the voters, help children get the best start and receive the services they need sooner?

Michele Assante

Wendover Road, Newtown                                            August 1, 2012