The School District

Strives For Efficiency

To the Editor:

During the school budget review process, many questions are asked by many audiences. It is a very detailed and complicated budget for which information is continuously made available and answers are always provided.

Audiences try to distill this budget down to global conclusions. This is an attempt to generalize a quick unjustified position with no consideration of need. The budget details every required expense for both program justification and control.

We operate without personnel or purchasing departments and take our fiduciary responsibility quite seriously. We run an effective operation that benefits the entire community. We strive to create efficiencies. The following is just a partial list of what we have done:

*Standardized the terms of leased copiers within the district. Changed individual leases from three companies with multiple expiration dates to one with a four-year term at a cost per copy that does not increase during its life. Under this plan we pay only for the copies made rather than a machine’s capitalized cost. At this term conclusion we will be in an excellent position to go out for bids.

*Standardized the expiration of owner-operator bus contracts. Improved the contracts to benefit the district and changed the fee from a mileage rate to a daily rate. Included penalty provisions for contractual violations, and significantly reduced the buyout provisions should we need to reduce the number of busses.

*Bid and negotiated for oil and diesel contracts. For four years we have beat a consortium of 40 communities and secured prices that have been the envy of our neighbors. This year we paid 66 cents per gallon and the consortium paid 81. The town is the beneficiary of our purchasing power as they piggyback on our program.

*Purchased school supplies through a consortium that has consistently secured prices lower than the State of Connecticut.

*Changed medical benefits co-payment for all employees to ten percent of actual premium.

Critics have stated that reductions to proposed increases are not cuts. This does not account for legal commitments that the district is responsible for: Salary increases negotiated in good faith, benefit cost increases, higher energy costs, bus contract commitments, higher liability rates, and overall cost requirements to annualize the Reed school and provide for additional student growth.

There is retrenchment in this budget. Last year we spent $1 million for building and site improvement, this year we budgeted $592,323, and next year we proposed $371,400. This is $220,923 less than the current year. To get back to this year’s level will take years. The buildings are getting older and need more attention; in addition they are getting more use by the community. Additionally, the technology budget has been cut drastically.

Over the years, we have managed all the pressures within our budget. With increasing tuition, energy costs, and medical increases we have never gone back to the town to ask for supplemental funds. Currently, we are dealing with a $400,000 deficit. This will be covered from existing program needs and project delays. As this deficit results primarily from services provided to special children;, these same needs will be waiting for us next year without the necessary fund to cover these expenses.

We are all committed to the Newtown schools and will continue to work as hard as possible to do our best with whatever level of funding we are given. However, we urge you to support this budget so it will not be reduced. Your positive vote in the referendum is essential to maintain the quality the community expects and deserves.

Ronald J. Bienkowski

Newtown Public Schools

Director of Business

4 Fairfield Circle South, Newtown                               May 21, 2003