Following is an article from today's KCT on the budget. The FTM is tomorrow night; if you want a zero tax increase suggest you attend tomorrow nigght's meeting at the high school GYMNASIUM (not the auditorium).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Officials dispel budget ‘rumors’
Sunday, 28 June 2009
HANNAH PIECUCHhclarkin@ricentral.com This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it COVENTRY — A zero percent increase in taxes will be put before the voters of Coventry at the Financial Town Meeting on Tuesday, June 30, says Council Vice-President Laura Flanagan.“There is no other community in Rhode Island whose council has provided a 0 percent increase in their budget,” she said. “And this isn’t a revaluation year, so that means that taxpayers won’t see a cent difference on their tax bill.”In spite of the work that she, Council President Raymond Spear and the Coventry Finance Director Warren West have put into constructing a budget that gives tax relief, Flanagan feels that the budget has been misrepresented through rumors and incorrect statements, she said.
Rumors about the impact of the budget have been spread in a disingenuous manner, Flanagan said — that layoffs will topple town departments, that the council has forced the closing of Oak Haven Elementary School, is demanding huge fees to be paid by the sports league and to attend town summer camps, is depriving charities of operational expenses in the town and is spending thousands of unnecessary dollars on their recently contracted law firm Edwards Angell Palmer and Dodge. Most of these rumors do not have a factual basis, Flanagan and Spear said. The total budget comes in at $87,021,668, representing a 6.6 percent reduction in the operating costs, a more-than halved capital improvement budget and a level-funded school budget, according to figures provide by West.This budget is nearly $2 million less than the fiscal year 2009 budget, according to numbers provided by West, but it will not cripple town departments, Flanagan and Spear said. “I trust Warren [West],” Flanagan said. “I think he knows what he’s doing and knows this town enough that he would tell us if these cuts we’re making would prevent the town from operating.”
The department of public works will lose three employees, West said, but none of these positions are lost through layoffs. Over the course of the year two DPW employees passed away — one refuse courier and one roads and bridges driver — West said. One mechanic from vehicle maintenance left his position for medical reasons. These positions will not be filled, but the department has already been operating with them empty this fiscal year.The only layoffs that will occur in the municipal budget are the elimination of one part-time position in the tax collector’s office, that only cost the town $2,000 a year and the elimination of one part time position in the town clerk’s office for an employee who will keep their position in another town department, West said.
The hiring freeze leaves the town manager’s office down one clerk and the tax assessor’s office down one clerk because of layoffs, West continued. At the police department, the budget removes funding for an officer who was called up for the National Guard, Flanagan said — that officer will receive pay through the National Guard so it is unnecessary to budget for him — and two officers who would have been trained to replace a retirement and the officer called up for the National Guard will remain in their current position. In short, there will be three open positions at the police department.
The discussion surrounding the closing of Oak Haven has placed the blame for the decision on the town council. This is not fair, said Spear, speaking as a former superintendent and the chairman of the school committee. “Closing Oak Haven School has been on the docket for three years in a row,” he said. “The town council did not put it there, the school committee put it there.”Oak Haven is only an issue because it has been made an issue, Spear continued. The biggest impact is going to be in the Oak Haven neighborhood, but other areas will lose or gain 20 to 40 students.The way that Superintendent Kenneth DiPietro has presented it, Spear said, “you’d think that every kid in the town was getting turned upside down.”Handling the school closure this way is “very unprofessional on the part of the superintendent,” Spear said. “It’s been made a political issue when it doesn’t have to be a political issue. If you can educate kids well in five schools instead of six and save money, then you can do it.”
Many residents may forget, Spear added, that when he was superintendent in the 1980s, the town leadership found it expedient to close the Tiogue Elementary School for a time. “I don’t remember it being a great big mess back then.” The school department leadership, the school committee and the parents of elementary school students in the district need to stay calm, Spear said, and if they do, their children will get through the initial change and be just fine. The council does not decide to close a school or keep a school open, emphasized Flanagan, the school committee does. The school committee has had since January to reconcile the fact that they are being level-funded by the town council, she added.
Many complaints have circulated regarding cuts to the Parks and Recreation Department budget, Flanagan said. Ironically, this department is the only one where the department head was given a set budget and allowed to determine his own cuts. Recreation Director Guy Lefebvre was given a set amount, she said, “we told him that he could increase his revenues by increasing the fees to the summer camp — which was only $12 a week. I don’t know of anywhere in this state that you could send your kids to summer camp for $12 a week. It was $100 a week at the YMCA ten years ago. We told him that we need to get our fees to a place where they’re covering our costs so we strongly encouraged him to raise fees.”For families who cannot afford the increase, Flanagan added, there is assistance available through the Department of Human Services and they are welcome to apply for aid through the Waterman/Fiske Assistance Program.
The increase in fees to play on sports teams, such as the Ram’s Football team, was also Lefebvre’s own decision, Flanagan said. Now, instead of the town donating the money to pay for lights and field use, players will have to pay themselves.“What this amounts to is that every child pays $5 more — for the season,” Flanagan said. “It’s important to note that the way we are changing things makes our programs more user-oriented,” Flanagan said. “Rather than put the burden of paying for summer camp or recreation leagues on all the taxpayers in this town, we’re putting it on the people who want to use them.“We don’t think any of the user fees are exorbitant,” she added. “If I don’t see an increase in my taxes, I can put out $5 for my kid to play football or pay $25 a week this summer to send them to summer camp.”
Cutting out the charitable donations line-item has generated a lot of complaints, Flanagan said. Veterans programs, the Greene Library, the Good Samaritans and other organizations will not receive any money from the town this year.Charitable donations amounted to $90,775 in last year’s budget, West said and were proposed to amount to $95,775 in the town manager’s budget for this year. The council has zeroed out that amount. This does not mean that those charities will not be supported in the future, Flanagan said, “but in a year when we’re asking municipal employees to take no pay raises and asking them to increase their health-insurance contributions — it seems like a slap in the face to turn around and donate nearly $100,000 to charities.”When it came to looking at all the charities that the town has supported, Flanagan said, the council did not want to pick and choose which to keep and which to discontinue. They simply decided, “this year we’re not going to do it.”
Employing Law Firm Edwards, Angel, Palmer and Dodge has received a lot of public criticism when residents saw the amount that was budgeted, Flanagan said. This year’s legal budget is listed in one line item, West said, and it includes $175,000 for legal services, $200,000 budgeted for ongoing litigation, based on a recommendation from the firm, and $75,000 to cover legal expenses for the school department. The whole number this year is $449,000 for all legal items, West said. In prior years there was a line-item for legal services that was considerably smaller, but other legal expenses were worked into other sections of the budget and nothing was budgeted for ongoing litigation. When all these fees were compiled in one place, the council in Fiscal Year 2008 had budgeted $374,000 for legal services, West said.
Many of the rumors that Flanagan and Spear addressed were published in the Reminder this week, a copy of which was provided by Flanagan. The advertisement was paid for by Bruce Desrosiers acting as Treasurer of “Concerned Citizens for Coventry,” according to the ad. Desrosiers could not be reached for comment.Supporting the budget this fiscal year are Flanagan and Spear and Councilman Glenford Shibley. Both Councilman Frank Hyde and Councilman Kenneth Cloutier voted against the budget when it came before the council.
Although the budget passed the town council 3-2, Flanagan said, it’s not a done deal. Taxpayers in Coventry do have the power to add or subtract items from the budget or to defeat the budget altogether.People who are excited that there is no tax increase in the budget should not be thanking her now, Flanagan said. “It’s not a done deal. Don’t thank me, come out to the Financial Town Meeting and make it happen.”Now is the time to begin cutting taxes so that Coventry can cease being one of the highest-taxed communities in Rhode Island, Spear said. In order to do so, the town must start somewhere and “now is the time and now is the place to start.”Copies of the town council’s recommended budget are available on the Coventry town Web site: http://town.coventry.ri.us.
Residents can weigh in on the budget by voting at the Financial Town Meeting this Tuesday, June 30 at 7 p.m. at the high school auditorium.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Financial Town Meeting June 30th
Posting a letter from Town Council Vice Pres. Laura Flanagan urging Coventry residents to attend next week's FTM. I have some comments on item numbers 3, 4, 7 and 8.
----
Hi All,
I need to ask for your help in spreading the word on the IMPORTANCE of every registered voter attending the
Financial Town Meeting on Tuesday, June 30th, 2009 at 7 pm in the High School Auditorium.
Many people are under the false impression that the Council's adoption of a no tax increase budget, means that it is set in stone. This is NOT the case.
IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO SEE YOUR TAXES GO UP, YOU MUST ATTEND AND VOTE AT THE FINANCIAL TOWN MEETING
CAST YOUR VOTES AGAINST CHANGES TO THE BUDGET
CAST YOUR VOTES FOR PASSAGE OF A ZERO TAX INCREASE BUDGET AS PRESENTED BY A MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL.
In Coventry, the PEOPLE adopt a budget at the annual financial town meeting, not the Council. This is mandated by our Town's Charter.
The Council only works to develop what is presented at this meeting. There will be a vote taken, and every registered voter has a right to weigh in.
There are many special interests groups lobbying against what the Council has adopted, and they will be at this meeting to add money, increasing taxes, with their votes.
You will hear many exaggerations of this budget's impact on Town Services - these are misleading, at best. Here are a few and the truth of these matters:
1) The summer camp program run through Parks and Recs is going up from some $80 to $175.
a. THE TRUTH IS THIS FEE REPRESENTS THE CHARGE FOR AN ENTIRE 7 WEEKS OF FULL DAY CAMP! WE HAVE BEEN CHARGING ONLY $12 per week for full day camp! We all know paying the employees and all other related expenses costs far far more than $12 - and there is no other organization around that offers this great of a deal. The fee has been increased to $25 per week in the proposed budget... Still a really discounted rate for full day camp. The program is 7 weeks long - for a total of $175.
2) Raising the rate on Day Camp will make it impossible for families to afford.
a. THE TRUTH is that if a family cannot afford $25 per week, and is in need of camp in order to work, they can apply for Assistance through the Department of Human Services Waterman Fiske Assistance Program, established earlier this year by this Council. If qualified, the program can pay for the entire fee on behalf of a family.
3) Outside Organizations losing funding.
a. THE TRUTH IS that the Town of Coventry gives away approximately $100,000 each year to help support outside organizations. When times are tough, and we are asking town employees to take salary freezes, it would seem appropriate to stop making charitable contributions. The majority of this council eliminated the entire contribution budget, and did not single out any particular organization. It is my hope that contributions can be restored when the economy improves, and as the taxpayers deem appropriate.
******** MY COMMENT - I hope some way will be found to restore funding to the all-volunteer civic groups. WA ************
4) Funding for private sports organizations that use the Parks and Recs fields has been eliminated.
a. THE TRUTH: The Parks and Recs department, through its own budget (and not the Town's "Contribution" budget noted in (3) above), has made donations in the past to support private youth leagues. The Council did not instruct that these contributions be cut. The director of this department was given a figure for his budget and he alone decided to eliminate these donations, rather than trim other expenditures, or increase fees on programs (such as the day camp, dance lessons, and other programs offered through Parks & Rec for a nominal fee). At the financial town meeting, every taxpayer has the opportunity to move funding from one line item to another by Motion, Second and a vote of all in attendance.
******** MY COMMENT - I hope some way will be found to restore funding to the all-volunteer sports organizations. WA **************
5) PAYING FOR TRASH PICKUP.
a. THE TRUTH: This budget does not include paying for trash pickup. This service will continue to be provided and supported by tax dollars.
6) CLOSURE OF OAK HAVEN SCHOOL.
a. THE TRUTH: The Town council does NOT have the authority to close schools. The Council sets the overall budget for the school department - this year, some $62,000,000. The school committee is the elected body who decides if a school will remain opened or closed.
7) SENIOR TAX FREEZE.
a. THE TRUTH: The Town council has worked diligently to cut expenses, rather than changing or eliminating the Senior Tax Freeze. If this budget fails, and the State continues to reduce its aid to cities/towns (as is likely), the Senior Tax Freeze may well be jeopardized, as there are very few places left to generate new revenue, if expenses cannot be cut. It is not the desire of this Council to change the Senior Tax Freeze, as evidenced by the budget now before the taxpayers. We prefer reducing expenditures and running more efficiently.
************ MY COMMENT - We probably all know some friends, neighbors or relatives who have benefited from the senior tax freeze. The tax freeze was implemented some years ago without having first been studied to understand what the effects would be. Some eligibility guidelines were amended a year or two ago but otherwise the freeze was not changed. Before the freeze is ever amended, I recommend that a comprehensive study of the freeze be done first to determine how it has affected all taxpayers in town. WA ************
8) ATTORNEY'S HAVE BEEN GIVEN A 159% INCREASE IN PAY
a. THE TRUTH. In prior years, the Solicitor's budget of $179,000 has been put before and approved by the taxpayers of this community. All the while, the reality of actual expenditures for these fees tells a much different story. For the past two years, we have continually run far over the solicitor budget and these expenses have been paid from a variety of other line items, outside of the solicitor account. In 2007, the town spent approximately $340,000 on legal expenses and in 2006, the number was closer to $400,000, but still the $179K figure was budgeted. The current Town Council has chosen to place all expected legal expenses in one account, as opposed to under budgeting and overspending, failing to disclose to the taxpayer the true cost. This year the council has additionally agreed to take over school legal expenses, for approximately $75,000, in an effort to help the schools achieve a level funded budget. In all reality, we are forecasting a true increase of about 7 percent over last year's expenditures, AND NOT 159% AS FALSELY STATED. The result of attempting to bring these costs into one budget has the appearance of a large increase, however, this is not reality.
************MY COMMENT - The the town has not been disclosing the actual amounts that were spent on legal at least in the previous two years in a manner that any ordinary resident would notice. Starting this year there will be some transparency with this expenditure. We finally have the specialized legal counsel that was badly needed to deal with a few lawsuits pending against the town. A judgment against the town from any of these suits could cost us millions of dollars. This is money well spent. WA **************
When I campaigned earlier this year, I heard each voice in my district. Overwhelmingly, people desired tax relief and seniors desired protection of the tax freeze. It was my desire to reduce taxes, but that was simply impossible due to the cuts Coventry sustained from the state. Holding taxes steady, with no change to the freeze is the best we are able to bring forward, without hurting essential services to our residents. Now, however, it is up to the each of you to approve or disapprove of our proposal. As your councilwoman, I have kept my commitment to you. Now, I would ask you to come out on June 30th and cast your vote. Let's join together and say enough to high taxes, enough to hurting property values, enough to business as usual, enough to the greed of the vocal minority. These are your tax dollars and this is your town. Please be present on June 30th and VOTE! Every one counts.
Warmest regards,
Laura
Laura A. Flanagan
Vice President
Coventry Town Council
District 2
----
Hi All,
I need to ask for your help in spreading the word on the IMPORTANCE of every registered voter attending the
Financial Town Meeting on Tuesday, June 30th, 2009 at 7 pm in the High School Auditorium.
Many people are under the false impression that the Council's adoption of a no tax increase budget, means that it is set in stone. This is NOT the case.
IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO SEE YOUR TAXES GO UP, YOU MUST ATTEND AND VOTE AT THE FINANCIAL TOWN MEETING
CAST YOUR VOTES AGAINST CHANGES TO THE BUDGET
CAST YOUR VOTES FOR PASSAGE OF A ZERO TAX INCREASE BUDGET AS PRESENTED BY A MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL.
In Coventry, the PEOPLE adopt a budget at the annual financial town meeting, not the Council. This is mandated by our Town's Charter.
The Council only works to develop what is presented at this meeting. There will be a vote taken, and every registered voter has a right to weigh in.
There are many special interests groups lobbying against what the Council has adopted, and they will be at this meeting to add money, increasing taxes, with their votes.
You will hear many exaggerations of this budget's impact on Town Services - these are misleading, at best. Here are a few and the truth of these matters:
1) The summer camp program run through Parks and Recs is going up from some $80 to $175.
a. THE TRUTH IS THIS FEE REPRESENTS THE CHARGE FOR AN ENTIRE 7 WEEKS OF FULL DAY CAMP! WE HAVE BEEN CHARGING ONLY $12 per week for full day camp! We all know paying the employees and all other related expenses costs far far more than $12 - and there is no other organization around that offers this great of a deal. The fee has been increased to $25 per week in the proposed budget... Still a really discounted rate for full day camp. The program is 7 weeks long - for a total of $175.
2) Raising the rate on Day Camp will make it impossible for families to afford.
a. THE TRUTH is that if a family cannot afford $25 per week, and is in need of camp in order to work, they can apply for Assistance through the Department of Human Services Waterman Fiske Assistance Program, established earlier this year by this Council. If qualified, the program can pay for the entire fee on behalf of a family.
3) Outside Organizations losing funding.
a. THE TRUTH IS that the Town of Coventry gives away approximately $100,000 each year to help support outside organizations. When times are tough, and we are asking town employees to take salary freezes, it would seem appropriate to stop making charitable contributions. The majority of this council eliminated the entire contribution budget, and did not single out any particular organization. It is my hope that contributions can be restored when the economy improves, and as the taxpayers deem appropriate.
******** MY COMMENT - I hope some way will be found to restore funding to the all-volunteer civic groups. WA ************
4) Funding for private sports organizations that use the Parks and Recs fields has been eliminated.
a. THE TRUTH: The Parks and Recs department, through its own budget (and not the Town's "Contribution" budget noted in (3) above), has made donations in the past to support private youth leagues. The Council did not instruct that these contributions be cut. The director of this department was given a figure for his budget and he alone decided to eliminate these donations, rather than trim other expenditures, or increase fees on programs (such as the day camp, dance lessons, and other programs offered through Parks & Rec for a nominal fee). At the financial town meeting, every taxpayer has the opportunity to move funding from one line item to another by Motion, Second and a vote of all in attendance.
******** MY COMMENT - I hope some way will be found to restore funding to the all-volunteer sports organizations. WA **************
5) PAYING FOR TRASH PICKUP.
a. THE TRUTH: This budget does not include paying for trash pickup. This service will continue to be provided and supported by tax dollars.
6) CLOSURE OF OAK HAVEN SCHOOL.
a. THE TRUTH: The Town council does NOT have the authority to close schools. The Council sets the overall budget for the school department - this year, some $62,000,000. The school committee is the elected body who decides if a school will remain opened or closed.
7) SENIOR TAX FREEZE.
a. THE TRUTH: The Town council has worked diligently to cut expenses, rather than changing or eliminating the Senior Tax Freeze. If this budget fails, and the State continues to reduce its aid to cities/towns (as is likely), the Senior Tax Freeze may well be jeopardized, as there are very few places left to generate new revenue, if expenses cannot be cut. It is not the desire of this Council to change the Senior Tax Freeze, as evidenced by the budget now before the taxpayers. We prefer reducing expenditures and running more efficiently.
************ MY COMMENT - We probably all know some friends, neighbors or relatives who have benefited from the senior tax freeze. The tax freeze was implemented some years ago without having first been studied to understand what the effects would be. Some eligibility guidelines were amended a year or two ago but otherwise the freeze was not changed. Before the freeze is ever amended, I recommend that a comprehensive study of the freeze be done first to determine how it has affected all taxpayers in town. WA ************
8) ATTORNEY'S HAVE BEEN GIVEN A 159% INCREASE IN PAY
a. THE TRUTH. In prior years, the Solicitor's budget of $179,000 has been put before and approved by the taxpayers of this community. All the while, the reality of actual expenditures for these fees tells a much different story. For the past two years, we have continually run far over the solicitor budget and these expenses have been paid from a variety of other line items, outside of the solicitor account. In 2007, the town spent approximately $340,000 on legal expenses and in 2006, the number was closer to $400,000, but still the $179K figure was budgeted. The current Town Council has chosen to place all expected legal expenses in one account, as opposed to under budgeting and overspending, failing to disclose to the taxpayer the true cost. This year the council has additionally agreed to take over school legal expenses, for approximately $75,000, in an effort to help the schools achieve a level funded budget. In all reality, we are forecasting a true increase of about 7 percent over last year's expenditures, AND NOT 159% AS FALSELY STATED. The result of attempting to bring these costs into one budget has the appearance of a large increase, however, this is not reality.
************MY COMMENT - The the town has not been disclosing the actual amounts that were spent on legal at least in the previous two years in a manner that any ordinary resident would notice. Starting this year there will be some transparency with this expenditure. We finally have the specialized legal counsel that was badly needed to deal with a few lawsuits pending against the town. A judgment against the town from any of these suits could cost us millions of dollars. This is money well spent. WA **************
When I campaigned earlier this year, I heard each voice in my district. Overwhelmingly, people desired tax relief and seniors desired protection of the tax freeze. It was my desire to reduce taxes, but that was simply impossible due to the cuts Coventry sustained from the state. Holding taxes steady, with no change to the freeze is the best we are able to bring forward, without hurting essential services to our residents. Now, however, it is up to the each of you to approve or disapprove of our proposal. As your councilwoman, I have kept my commitment to you. Now, I would ask you to come out on June 30th and cast your vote. Let's join together and say enough to high taxes, enough to hurting property values, enough to business as usual, enough to the greed of the vocal minority. These are your tax dollars and this is your town. Please be present on June 30th and VOTE! Every one counts.
Warmest regards,
Laura
Laura A. Flanagan
Vice President
Coventry Town Council
District 2
Friday, June 19, 2009
Meetings next week
Town Council June 22: THIS MEETING HAS BEEN CANCELLED http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4232/2009/75664.pdf
School Committee June 23. Includes workshop on elementary school redistricting plan:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4248/2009/75721.pdf
Planning Commission June 24:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4233/2009/75741.pdf
Includes the following agenda items -
Pre-Application: “Coventry Asphalt Silos”; Coventry Asphalt Realty,
LLC
Installation of 4 Hot Mix Asphalt Storage Silos
AP 52, Lot 62.1; Zone I1
75 Airport Road
PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING-Continued
Master Plan: “Coventry Meadows”; Coventry Housing Associates
Corporation
Comprehensive Permit for Low/Mod Housing Land Development
Project
AP 38, Lot 100; Zone GB and AP 30, Lot 161; Zone R-20
Tiogue Avenue
PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING
Major Land Development/Master Plan: “CVS Pharmacy”; R.I CVS
Pharmacy, LLC.
Proposed New Store
AP 38, Lots 105, 106 & 107; Zone GB
Tiogue Avenue & Wood Street
Board of Canvassers June 25:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4237/2009/75609.pdf
Note: The annual Financial Town Meeting will take place on June 30th.
The next Zoning Board meeting is scheduled for July 1st.
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4234/2009/75585.pdf
School Committee June 23. Includes workshop on elementary school redistricting plan:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4248/2009/75721.pdf
Planning Commission June 24:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4233/2009/75741.pdf
Includes the following agenda items -
Pre-Application: “Coventry Asphalt Silos”; Coventry Asphalt Realty,
LLC
Installation of 4 Hot Mix Asphalt Storage Silos
AP 52, Lot 62.1; Zone I1
75 Airport Road
PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING-Continued
Master Plan: “Coventry Meadows”; Coventry Housing Associates
Corporation
Comprehensive Permit for Low/Mod Housing Land Development
Project
AP 38, Lot 100; Zone GB and AP 30, Lot 161; Zone R-20
Tiogue Avenue
PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING
Major Land Development/Master Plan: “CVS Pharmacy”; R.I CVS
Pharmacy, LLC.
Proposed New Store
AP 38, Lots 105, 106 & 107; Zone GB
Tiogue Avenue & Wood Street
Board of Canvassers June 25:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4237/2009/75609.pdf
Note: The annual Financial Town Meeting will take place on June 30th.
The next Zoning Board meeting is scheduled for July 1st.
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4234/2009/75585.pdf
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Our Greatest Deficit
Below is a letter sent by TC Vice President Laura Flanagan to all the members of the School Committee on May 31, 2009. In it she clearly states her reasons for objecting to the new 3-year contract that was ultimately approved last Tuesday night. It's very informative.
If any member of the School Committee would like to provide me with a serious analysis of the new agreement with the CTA from their perspective, I would be glad to post it here.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
May 31, 2009
Hand Delivered
Honorable Members of the Coventry
School Committee
Ms. Kathleen Patenaude, Chairperson
Mr. Andrew Perra, Vice Chairman
Mr. Thomas Heatherman
Ms. Lisa Tomasso
Ms. Nancy Sprengelmeyer
Dear Members of the School Committee:
The purpose of this letter is to state my position in a formal, written manner over the potential ratification and approval of a proposed new 3 year contract with the Coventry Teachers’ Alliance (“CTA”).
Let me begin by saying that I believe that all parties have been working very hard, and I want to recognize the value of those efforts. I also acknowledge that the School Committee, by virtue of our charter, has full authority to enter into contracts with the CTA, with or without the consent of the Town Council.
In late March, I received an e-mail from Ms. Kelly Erinakes, President of the CTA, requesting a meeting or telephone conversation. We did connect by telephone and talked for some time, in an effort to find common ground, regarding the tentative terms of an arrangement whereby the CTA would make some $700,000-$800,000 in salary concessions in exchange for a commitment from the Town Council to Levy $750,000 in new taxes as a show of its “commitment to education”. I firmly stated my belief was that a $62,000,000 budget was quite a commitment to education. I was also very clear in stating my fundamental disagreement to any union being allowed to bargain with a demand for tax increases.
On May 16th, Council President Spear indicated to me that Mr. DiPietro thought he could secure a “0-0-0” contract with the CTA, essentially freezing the 08-09 salary schedule. Mr. Spear and another member of the council met with Mr. DiPietro on Sunday, May 17th, to discuss the proposal. Mr. DiPietro indicated that if the Council adopted a budget that level funded the schools, as it was prepared to do on Monday, May 18th, the CTA would cut off all negotiations and he would be forced to close Oak Haven and cut the programs he had previously outlined to the public. Based upon this representation, the Council unanimously tabled the budget at its May 18th meeting to allow time for the school committee to finalize this agreement.
Last week, Mr. Spear and Mr. DiPietro met to review the final details of a tentative agreement reached with the CTA. I was provided with copies of a detailed analysis of the agreement. Rather than a “0-0-0”, the deal more accurately represents “0.23%-0.74%-2%” (weighted average increase to salary schedule in each of the next 3 years). The following weekend was spent reviewing, analyzing and discussing the new 3 year contract your committee now seeks to approve. My understanding is that the committee originally sought the “blessing” of the Council over this arrangement, and a commitment to increase taxes by $750,000. I contacted Mr. DiPietro by phone with concerns/questions, not entirely dismissing the proposal, but seeking clarification on a few points. We had several lengthy, detailed conversations. I also discussed the arrangement with 2 members of the School Committee, expressing my concerns over the agreement, and listening to their points of view.
The apparent unwillingness of the CTA, the Superintendent and School Committee to attempt to secure concessions in the remaining year of the current contract (rather than a 3 year contract), with true givebacks to the community to save children’s programs is disturbing and prevents the Town from ascertaining funding sources next year. Why are the parties closing their eyes to the potential risks associated with guarantees of salary increases 3 years out, in a time of such great uncertainty? RIPEC has publicly released information in its article appearing on the front page of the May 25, 2009 Providence Journal indicating its forecast for Rhode Island Towns/Cities. The forecast is bleak: expenses are expected to rise at a greater rate than revenues and the deficit we now face is projected to grow greater in the coming years. In addition, I was recently made aware by Mr. West, our finance director, that the State is considering reducing the Reimbursement of Auto Excise tax exemptions to Cities and Towns this year; this has the potential to represent up to $1,000,000 in lost revenue for Coventry. It is unclear whether or not we will be allowed relief from Senate Bill 3050 regarding any such reduction. Further, the leadership of the Council has been advised of additional liabilities likely payable in 09-10 exceeding $1,000,000, although we are not at liberty to publicly discuss the particulars, due to the sensitive ongoing nature of litigation discussions.
After having the opportunities described in the paragraphs above to listen, ask questions and analyze the tentative agreement, as well as the current economic climate and other issues the Town will face this year and next, it is clear to me that this proposal does not represent what was originally offered and contains risks that the Town should not responsibly assume.
My interpretation and understanding of some of the details contained in the proposal are as follows:
1) A reduction of the work year by 3 days, from 186 to 183, with a slight increase in salary.
2) The addition of 3 days in the form of “Professional Development”, at a cost of $150,000.
3) An increase in the longevity schedule of $250 at every level, with an estimated expense of $50,000 in the first year. This addition gives the majority of top step teachers a salary increase outside of the salary schedule and these numbers will be difficult to reduce in future negotiations.
4) The freezing of co-payments towards health insurance for the first 2 years at a fixed dollar amount that represents 15% of the cost today. I believe there is significant risk in this concession, the greatest being in year 2. Blue Cross has publicly stated its intentions to increase its rates by some 15-18%. Although we participate in the West Bay Collaborative, this increase could significantly affect the cost of the Stop Loss Policy, and would then be entirely borne by the school/town, having the potential to wipe out any savings achieved in that year. A significant increase in claims would also pose an added risk of increases. I believe this concession is a gamble we may not win.
5) The illustrations which I reviewed indicate that the proposal gives teachers not on top step a weighted average increase this year of 7.27%, next year of 7.07% and 8.27% in year three.
6) The proposal contains the option for the CTA to renegotiate another three year contract, in the event that funding is not available in later years.
I believe that the time allowed by tabling the budget has been used to finalize the terms of an agreement already in the works for months, as evidenced by Ms. Erinakes' email and telephone call, in late March, outlining and seeking support for the same.
If it is true, as represented to me by members of the School Committee, that Mr. Erinakes and Attorney Tobin took part in School Committee executive session discussions held on Tuesday, May 26th, 2009, over this proposal, then I find the negotiation process deeply disconcerting. The nepotism provisions of the Rhode Island Code of Ethics are quite clear on the prohibition of the involvement of public employees in contract negotiations, when in fact their spouses, or other immediate family members, are covered by the subject contract.
Where is our Courage? Why are we not standing together (the school committee and the Council) seeking a one year contract with concessions? Is it simply too difficult? Is the union unwilling? Is this the way it is always done? When are we going to start considering the consequences of the decisions we make today on our ability to pay tomorrow?
It is my belief that the end does not always justify the means. While I recognize that the salary schedule is slightly lower at the end of this new 3-year deal, than it would be in the 09-10 current contract (which would be fantastic in a prosperous, predictable economy), a new three year contract in the current climate is truly more beneficial to the union than the school/town. It offers protection for the union during difficult economic times and places all of the risk on the town/taxpayers. It is my belief that the School Committee would have a significant bargaining advantage and the ability to achieve greater, long-term results, most beneficial to the children and residents of our community, if the last year of the current contract were simply renegotiated.
Lastly, and most importantly, if this proposed contract is accepted, I believe it is highly probable the Town will not have the resources available next year or the year after to fund it, due to all of the aforementioned considerations. We may well find ourselves in the same position we are in today…. choosing between salaries and programs/services for children.
Perhaps our greatest deficit in Coventry is COURAGE.
Very truly yours,
Laura A. Flanagan
Vice President
Coventry Town Council
cc: Council President Raymond Spear
If any member of the School Committee would like to provide me with a serious analysis of the new agreement with the CTA from their perspective, I would be glad to post it here.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
May 31, 2009
Hand Delivered
Honorable Members of the Coventry
School Committee
Ms. Kathleen Patenaude, Chairperson
Mr. Andrew Perra, Vice Chairman
Mr. Thomas Heatherman
Ms. Lisa Tomasso
Ms. Nancy Sprengelmeyer
Dear Members of the School Committee:
The purpose of this letter is to state my position in a formal, written manner over the potential ratification and approval of a proposed new 3 year contract with the Coventry Teachers’ Alliance (“CTA”).
Let me begin by saying that I believe that all parties have been working very hard, and I want to recognize the value of those efforts. I also acknowledge that the School Committee, by virtue of our charter, has full authority to enter into contracts with the CTA, with or without the consent of the Town Council.
In late March, I received an e-mail from Ms. Kelly Erinakes, President of the CTA, requesting a meeting or telephone conversation. We did connect by telephone and talked for some time, in an effort to find common ground, regarding the tentative terms of an arrangement whereby the CTA would make some $700,000-$800,000 in salary concessions in exchange for a commitment from the Town Council to Levy $750,000 in new taxes as a show of its “commitment to education”. I firmly stated my belief was that a $62,000,000 budget was quite a commitment to education. I was also very clear in stating my fundamental disagreement to any union being allowed to bargain with a demand for tax increases.
On May 16th, Council President Spear indicated to me that Mr. DiPietro thought he could secure a “0-0-0” contract with the CTA, essentially freezing the 08-09 salary schedule. Mr. Spear and another member of the council met with Mr. DiPietro on Sunday, May 17th, to discuss the proposal. Mr. DiPietro indicated that if the Council adopted a budget that level funded the schools, as it was prepared to do on Monday, May 18th, the CTA would cut off all negotiations and he would be forced to close Oak Haven and cut the programs he had previously outlined to the public. Based upon this representation, the Council unanimously tabled the budget at its May 18th meeting to allow time for the school committee to finalize this agreement.
Last week, Mr. Spear and Mr. DiPietro met to review the final details of a tentative agreement reached with the CTA. I was provided with copies of a detailed analysis of the agreement. Rather than a “0-0-0”, the deal more accurately represents “0.23%-0.74%-2%” (weighted average increase to salary schedule in each of the next 3 years). The following weekend was spent reviewing, analyzing and discussing the new 3 year contract your committee now seeks to approve. My understanding is that the committee originally sought the “blessing” of the Council over this arrangement, and a commitment to increase taxes by $750,000. I contacted Mr. DiPietro by phone with concerns/questions, not entirely dismissing the proposal, but seeking clarification on a few points. We had several lengthy, detailed conversations. I also discussed the arrangement with 2 members of the School Committee, expressing my concerns over the agreement, and listening to their points of view.
The apparent unwillingness of the CTA, the Superintendent and School Committee to attempt to secure concessions in the remaining year of the current contract (rather than a 3 year contract), with true givebacks to the community to save children’s programs is disturbing and prevents the Town from ascertaining funding sources next year. Why are the parties closing their eyes to the potential risks associated with guarantees of salary increases 3 years out, in a time of such great uncertainty? RIPEC has publicly released information in its article appearing on the front page of the May 25, 2009 Providence Journal indicating its forecast for Rhode Island Towns/Cities. The forecast is bleak: expenses are expected to rise at a greater rate than revenues and the deficit we now face is projected to grow greater in the coming years. In addition, I was recently made aware by Mr. West, our finance director, that the State is considering reducing the Reimbursement of Auto Excise tax exemptions to Cities and Towns this year; this has the potential to represent up to $1,000,000 in lost revenue for Coventry. It is unclear whether or not we will be allowed relief from Senate Bill 3050 regarding any such reduction. Further, the leadership of the Council has been advised of additional liabilities likely payable in 09-10 exceeding $1,000,000, although we are not at liberty to publicly discuss the particulars, due to the sensitive ongoing nature of litigation discussions.
After having the opportunities described in the paragraphs above to listen, ask questions and analyze the tentative agreement, as well as the current economic climate and other issues the Town will face this year and next, it is clear to me that this proposal does not represent what was originally offered and contains risks that the Town should not responsibly assume.
My interpretation and understanding of some of the details contained in the proposal are as follows:
1) A reduction of the work year by 3 days, from 186 to 183, with a slight increase in salary.
2) The addition of 3 days in the form of “Professional Development”, at a cost of $150,000.
3) An increase in the longevity schedule of $250 at every level, with an estimated expense of $50,000 in the first year. This addition gives the majority of top step teachers a salary increase outside of the salary schedule and these numbers will be difficult to reduce in future negotiations.
4) The freezing of co-payments towards health insurance for the first 2 years at a fixed dollar amount that represents 15% of the cost today. I believe there is significant risk in this concession, the greatest being in year 2. Blue Cross has publicly stated its intentions to increase its rates by some 15-18%. Although we participate in the West Bay Collaborative, this increase could significantly affect the cost of the Stop Loss Policy, and would then be entirely borne by the school/town, having the potential to wipe out any savings achieved in that year. A significant increase in claims would also pose an added risk of increases. I believe this concession is a gamble we may not win.
5) The illustrations which I reviewed indicate that the proposal gives teachers not on top step a weighted average increase this year of 7.27%, next year of 7.07% and 8.27% in year three.
6) The proposal contains the option for the CTA to renegotiate another three year contract, in the event that funding is not available in later years.
I believe that the time allowed by tabling the budget has been used to finalize the terms of an agreement already in the works for months, as evidenced by Ms. Erinakes' email and telephone call, in late March, outlining and seeking support for the same.
If it is true, as represented to me by members of the School Committee, that Mr. Erinakes and Attorney Tobin took part in School Committee executive session discussions held on Tuesday, May 26th, 2009, over this proposal, then I find the negotiation process deeply disconcerting. The nepotism provisions of the Rhode Island Code of Ethics are quite clear on the prohibition of the involvement of public employees in contract negotiations, when in fact their spouses, or other immediate family members, are covered by the subject contract.
Where is our Courage? Why are we not standing together (the school committee and the Council) seeking a one year contract with concessions? Is it simply too difficult? Is the union unwilling? Is this the way it is always done? When are we going to start considering the consequences of the decisions we make today on our ability to pay tomorrow?
It is my belief that the end does not always justify the means. While I recognize that the salary schedule is slightly lower at the end of this new 3-year deal, than it would be in the 09-10 current contract (which would be fantastic in a prosperous, predictable economy), a new three year contract in the current climate is truly more beneficial to the union than the school/town. It offers protection for the union during difficult economic times and places all of the risk on the town/taxpayers. It is my belief that the School Committee would have a significant bargaining advantage and the ability to achieve greater, long-term results, most beneficial to the children and residents of our community, if the last year of the current contract were simply renegotiated.
Lastly, and most importantly, if this proposed contract is accepted, I believe it is highly probable the Town will not have the resources available next year or the year after to fund it, due to all of the aforementioned considerations. We may well find ourselves in the same position we are in today…. choosing between salaries and programs/services for children.
Perhaps our greatest deficit in Coventry is COURAGE.
Very truly yours,
Laura A. Flanagan
Vice President
Coventry Town Council
cc: Council President Raymond Spear
Thursday, June 11, 2009
News Articles, Town Budget, New Teacher Contract
Kent County Times article on Town Budget passage:
Cov. council narrowly passes budget
Tuesday, 09 June 2009
HANNAH CLARKIN
COVENTRY — On a council split two against two, Council President Raymond Spear had the deciding vote on the fiscal year 2010 budget Monday night.
The budget, which Spear prepared with Council Vice-President Laura Flanagan, Finance Director Warren West and acting Town Manager Paul Sprague, came in at a total of $87,021,668, representing a 6.6 percent reduction in the operating costs, a more-than halved capital improvement budget and a level-funded school budget.This budget, nearly $2 million less than the fiscal year 2009 budget, was vocally supported by Flanagan and Councilman Glenford Shibley at the meeting. Both Councilman Frank Hyde and Councilman Kenneth Cloutier said they were uncomfortable with the cuts in the budget and the way it would impact town services. Spear did not state his opinion until the other council members had discussed the budget.The idea of a 0 percent tax increase is an admirable one, Cloutier said, but he was cautious to pass the budget without residents realizing how their services would be impacted. “I fear people won’t know what the cuts are until they happen,” he said. In his personal experience, cuts to the recreation department will take a third of the budget from the local football team, the Rams, and put a $7,000 burden on the people who play.“There are 4,200 kids who play in the town leagues,” he said. “So cuts to recreation are a sore spot with me.”
Hyde was in agreement with Cloutier, he said. “I see the positive reasons for a 0 percent tax increase,” he said. “But we’re cutting a snow plow driver, we’re hurting the kids, and its hard for me to look at my consituents knowing that their children will have to pay to play on the town fields and their services won’t be what they used to be.”Taking money out of the reserves to sustain the 0 percent tax increase and soften the cuts was his suggestion, Hyde said.There is currently $4.9 million in the unrestricted fund balance, said West. Of that, the town has to keep at least $4.4 million in order to keep a good credit rating, this leaves approximately $400,000 that could be used to suppliment the budget this year, West said. There is already $140,000 from the fund balance in the budget to account for deficits in the upcoming fiscal year. She supported the budget, Flanagan said, not because she was elected by any special interest groups, but because she listened to folks as she walked door to door during her campaign season. The overwhelming request from her constituents was for a tax break, and she vowed to support that.“My position hasn’t changed,” Flanagan said. “We’re asking folks to do more with less money. But if we don’t make some major changes it’s going to get worse and worse. I feel badly about some of the things in the budget — in the past we’ve given money away as charitable donations — but we can’t do that this year.“The taxpayers in this town deserve to have leaders who will fight for them,” Flanagan continued, “no matter what pressure comes or how it comes to them.”
Shibley’s campaign promises were similar to Flanagan’s, he said. “This is not an easy budget,” he admitted. “People are making concessions, but they can make that work. We have to hold the line on taxes.”Spear recognized the two sides of the table, he said, and came to a decision after many hours of thought and prayer, bearing in mind his years of background and experience.“Our obligations for tomorrow are already extended beyond reasonable and responsible levels of expectation, resources and funding,” he said in a prepared address. “This requires the necessity to deal with all related factors on a short term of expanding commitment, more careful and responsible planning, and based on more stable assurance that the funding ability to meet such commitments can be reasonably and responsibly met.”Implicit in his remarks, Spear made clear later, was disapproval of the newly negotiated school contract that the school committee will consider this week.“Let us not reach beyond that which we can responsibly control and commit to, based on the facts of today, as we strive to meet our needs and wants of our tomorrows,” he continued.“With these thoughts in mind, I find it necessary, appropriate, and in the best interest of the taxpayers of the community of Coventry, to set forth the programs and services for fiscal 2010 as established in the budget that herewith presented.”
When Spear moved the question so the council could vote on the matter, a resident in the audience made a point of order. She wanted to comment on the budget before the council voted, she said.This was not the appropriate forum, said Spear. “We have had four to six workshops on this budget where you could have commented,” he said. “Now we are going to finish the council’s business and public comment will be after we vote.”The auditorium erupted with shouts, boos and attempts to speak. The auditorium at the Town Hall Annex, the old Flat River Road Middle School, was filled with at least 200 residents who had come to weigh in on the budget. Teachers, veterans, seniors, members of local sports associations, and residents of every political persuasion were there to have their say.But this was not the forum, insisted Spear, even as Hyde challenged him, yelling and waving his arms. Spear took a short recess and allowed the police and town sergeant to quiet the meeting attendees.When the meeting opened back up, the audience began to chant, “let us speak, let us speak, let us speak,” along with claps and stomps.“You have your opportunity to speak at the Financial Town Meeting,” Spear said. “You have had your time to speak at our work sessions. This is not a public hearing and there is no public comment on this item.”
Shibley made a motion to accept the budget, Flanagan seconded it, and the budget passed with a vote of 3-2, Hyde and Cloutier dissenting.In the public comment that followed, the council received both accolades and criticism. But, almost universally, taxpayers were disappointed that the council had not allowed them an opportunity to speak before the budget was voted on.
KCT article on School Committee's passage of new teacher contract:
New teacher contract passed
Wednesday, 10 June 2009
HANNAH CLARKIN
COVENTRY — The Coventry School Committee entered into a new three-year contract with the Coventry Teachers’ Alliance on Tuesday night with a vote of 5-0.
Passage of the contract was not originally the plan for the evening, Chairwoman Katherine Patenaude said, but after hearing from the public and gaining a consensus that the whole school committee was ready to vote, she was ready to take the vote.“Because there was public notice previously that we were having the discussion I think that people who really wanted to know more about it could have made it out to the meeting,” she said. “The people who were there had their say.”The contract, as outlined by Superintendent Kenneth DiPietro represents a cut of approximately $2,210 per teacher over the next year and will save roughly $1 million in the first year.
The first year of the contract is frozen at the 2008-2009 salary schedule, the second year gives every teacher a flat raise of $500 and the third year each step receives a 2 percent increase. When that 2 percent increase comes in, DiPietro said, salaries will still be lower than they would have been just in 2009-2010, had the previous contract continued through to the end of next year. In addition to salary concessions, DiPietro said, some other concessions in the contract included freezing advanced degree increments, curriculum coordinator stipends, coaches stipends, co-curricular club stipends, and hourly professional development rates at the 2007-2008 schedules, DiPietro said. These will be frozen until 2012. Longevity rates were increased, given a flat increase all three years, he added.Through negotiations, the contract also contains language to specify the appropriate uses of advisory, the acceptable uses of common planning time, and the protocol for closing a school. “People say that contracts never talk about students and making a school better,” DiPietro said. “This one does. It puts requirements and expectations on planning time for teachers. And it gives checklists for teachers monitoring their students’ graduation portfolio and capstone projects. I don’t think most districts have these things written into their contracts.”
The contract does give teachers a health insurance contribution freeze, DiPietro said. But the freeze is only in effect for Fiscal Years 2009/2010 and 2010/2011. In 2011/2012 the full 15 percent co-pay will be reinstated. Teachers will be given a $350 reimbursement for purchasing instructional materials, DiPietro said. This funding will come from the supplies lines in the budget.A major give-back that the school committee gave the teachers is a limited layoff provision, DiPietro said. “Tenured teachers with four years of service in Coventry are not subject to layoff,” he said in his presentation. Currently there are only 20 to 30 teachers in Coventry who would be eligible for layoff until the contract is ended. While several teachers and residents did speak in favor of the contract, several residents spoke against it.One resident who identified himself as Joe Brown was not satisfied with DiPietro’s presentation of the budget. “I have to be honest, I’m real confused,” he said. “That’s a lot of information. It looks to me like there is a lot of fluff in the teachers’ salaries with the step increases and I don’t think you’re giving us an accurate picture.”DiPietro did not explain the step increases. “You’re amazingly disrespectful, Mr. Brown,” he said. “You’re accusing me of giving you incorrect information and I am not, these are the numbers.”
The school committee was interested in questions, Patenaude added. “If you have a question, we’ll answer it. Your opinions are not what we are interested in. If you want to stay for public comment you may do so.”Brown requested that the school committee try one more time to go back and get further concessions from the union.“Mr. Brown,” Patenaude responded. “We have met with the unions and we have done our job.”“So you’re satisfied?” Brown asked.“Yes,” Patenaude responded. The answer to the request of more concessions would be “no,” said President of the Coventry Teachers’ Alliance Kelly Erinakas after Brown’s question.“The school committee did what they were asked to and negotiated,” she said. “So did the Coventry Teachers’ Alliance. Members are giving up $2,700 each next year. That’s a lot out of anyone’s pocket and no, you cannot get more.”
Town Republican Committee Chair Charles Vacca asked for a figure of the cost of this contract over the next few years.Coming up with a specific number of the cost involves too many factors, DiPietro told him. The contract will cost an additional $1 million more in health care alone, and many other things will weigh in. Entering a contract without knowing the financial forecast of the town concerned him, Vacca said. “This whole system has a pitfall where we enter into contracts before we know what funds we will have.”
Having closed discussion, the school committee voted unanimously to accept the contract. Yesterday morning, Patenaude was still satisfied with the new contract, she said. “The people who really have their ear to the ground so to speak on what’s going on with contracts in the town knew the details already because we had shared them with the town council the day before,” she said. “[Council President Raymond Spear] showed up and didn’t have any questions, we certainly didn’t get any other calls from people saying ‘what are you thinking?’ And [Councilman] Frank Hyde came to the meeting and commended us for signing the contract.”
Cov. council narrowly passes budget
Tuesday, 09 June 2009
HANNAH CLARKIN
COVENTRY — On a council split two against two, Council President Raymond Spear had the deciding vote on the fiscal year 2010 budget Monday night.
The budget, which Spear prepared with Council Vice-President Laura Flanagan, Finance Director Warren West and acting Town Manager Paul Sprague, came in at a total of $87,021,668, representing a 6.6 percent reduction in the operating costs, a more-than halved capital improvement budget and a level-funded school budget.This budget, nearly $2 million less than the fiscal year 2009 budget, was vocally supported by Flanagan and Councilman Glenford Shibley at the meeting. Both Councilman Frank Hyde and Councilman Kenneth Cloutier said they were uncomfortable with the cuts in the budget and the way it would impact town services. Spear did not state his opinion until the other council members had discussed the budget.The idea of a 0 percent tax increase is an admirable one, Cloutier said, but he was cautious to pass the budget without residents realizing how their services would be impacted. “I fear people won’t know what the cuts are until they happen,” he said. In his personal experience, cuts to the recreation department will take a third of the budget from the local football team, the Rams, and put a $7,000 burden on the people who play.“There are 4,200 kids who play in the town leagues,” he said. “So cuts to recreation are a sore spot with me.”
Hyde was in agreement with Cloutier, he said. “I see the positive reasons for a 0 percent tax increase,” he said. “But we’re cutting a snow plow driver, we’re hurting the kids, and its hard for me to look at my consituents knowing that their children will have to pay to play on the town fields and their services won’t be what they used to be.”Taking money out of the reserves to sustain the 0 percent tax increase and soften the cuts was his suggestion, Hyde said.There is currently $4.9 million in the unrestricted fund balance, said West. Of that, the town has to keep at least $4.4 million in order to keep a good credit rating, this leaves approximately $400,000 that could be used to suppliment the budget this year, West said. There is already $140,000 from the fund balance in the budget to account for deficits in the upcoming fiscal year. She supported the budget, Flanagan said, not because she was elected by any special interest groups, but because she listened to folks as she walked door to door during her campaign season. The overwhelming request from her constituents was for a tax break, and she vowed to support that.“My position hasn’t changed,” Flanagan said. “We’re asking folks to do more with less money. But if we don’t make some major changes it’s going to get worse and worse. I feel badly about some of the things in the budget — in the past we’ve given money away as charitable donations — but we can’t do that this year.“The taxpayers in this town deserve to have leaders who will fight for them,” Flanagan continued, “no matter what pressure comes or how it comes to them.”
Shibley’s campaign promises were similar to Flanagan’s, he said. “This is not an easy budget,” he admitted. “People are making concessions, but they can make that work. We have to hold the line on taxes.”Spear recognized the two sides of the table, he said, and came to a decision after many hours of thought and prayer, bearing in mind his years of background and experience.“Our obligations for tomorrow are already extended beyond reasonable and responsible levels of expectation, resources and funding,” he said in a prepared address. “This requires the necessity to deal with all related factors on a short term of expanding commitment, more careful and responsible planning, and based on more stable assurance that the funding ability to meet such commitments can be reasonably and responsibly met.”Implicit in his remarks, Spear made clear later, was disapproval of the newly negotiated school contract that the school committee will consider this week.“Let us not reach beyond that which we can responsibly control and commit to, based on the facts of today, as we strive to meet our needs and wants of our tomorrows,” he continued.“With these thoughts in mind, I find it necessary, appropriate, and in the best interest of the taxpayers of the community of Coventry, to set forth the programs and services for fiscal 2010 as established in the budget that herewith presented.”
When Spear moved the question so the council could vote on the matter, a resident in the audience made a point of order. She wanted to comment on the budget before the council voted, she said.This was not the appropriate forum, said Spear. “We have had four to six workshops on this budget where you could have commented,” he said. “Now we are going to finish the council’s business and public comment will be after we vote.”The auditorium erupted with shouts, boos and attempts to speak. The auditorium at the Town Hall Annex, the old Flat River Road Middle School, was filled with at least 200 residents who had come to weigh in on the budget. Teachers, veterans, seniors, members of local sports associations, and residents of every political persuasion were there to have their say.But this was not the forum, insisted Spear, even as Hyde challenged him, yelling and waving his arms. Spear took a short recess and allowed the police and town sergeant to quiet the meeting attendees.When the meeting opened back up, the audience began to chant, “let us speak, let us speak, let us speak,” along with claps and stomps.“You have your opportunity to speak at the Financial Town Meeting,” Spear said. “You have had your time to speak at our work sessions. This is not a public hearing and there is no public comment on this item.”
Shibley made a motion to accept the budget, Flanagan seconded it, and the budget passed with a vote of 3-2, Hyde and Cloutier dissenting.In the public comment that followed, the council received both accolades and criticism. But, almost universally, taxpayers were disappointed that the council had not allowed them an opportunity to speak before the budget was voted on.
KCT article on School Committee's passage of new teacher contract:
New teacher contract passed
Wednesday, 10 June 2009
HANNAH CLARKIN
COVENTRY — The Coventry School Committee entered into a new three-year contract with the Coventry Teachers’ Alliance on Tuesday night with a vote of 5-0.
Passage of the contract was not originally the plan for the evening, Chairwoman Katherine Patenaude said, but after hearing from the public and gaining a consensus that the whole school committee was ready to vote, she was ready to take the vote.“Because there was public notice previously that we were having the discussion I think that people who really wanted to know more about it could have made it out to the meeting,” she said. “The people who were there had their say.”The contract, as outlined by Superintendent Kenneth DiPietro represents a cut of approximately $2,210 per teacher over the next year and will save roughly $1 million in the first year.
The first year of the contract is frozen at the 2008-2009 salary schedule, the second year gives every teacher a flat raise of $500 and the third year each step receives a 2 percent increase. When that 2 percent increase comes in, DiPietro said, salaries will still be lower than they would have been just in 2009-2010, had the previous contract continued through to the end of next year. In addition to salary concessions, DiPietro said, some other concessions in the contract included freezing advanced degree increments, curriculum coordinator stipends, coaches stipends, co-curricular club stipends, and hourly professional development rates at the 2007-2008 schedules, DiPietro said. These will be frozen until 2012. Longevity rates were increased, given a flat increase all three years, he added.Through negotiations, the contract also contains language to specify the appropriate uses of advisory, the acceptable uses of common planning time, and the protocol for closing a school. “People say that contracts never talk about students and making a school better,” DiPietro said. “This one does. It puts requirements and expectations on planning time for teachers. And it gives checklists for teachers monitoring their students’ graduation portfolio and capstone projects. I don’t think most districts have these things written into their contracts.”
The contract does give teachers a health insurance contribution freeze, DiPietro said. But the freeze is only in effect for Fiscal Years 2009/2010 and 2010/2011. In 2011/2012 the full 15 percent co-pay will be reinstated. Teachers will be given a $350 reimbursement for purchasing instructional materials, DiPietro said. This funding will come from the supplies lines in the budget.A major give-back that the school committee gave the teachers is a limited layoff provision, DiPietro said. “Tenured teachers with four years of service in Coventry are not subject to layoff,” he said in his presentation. Currently there are only 20 to 30 teachers in Coventry who would be eligible for layoff until the contract is ended. While several teachers and residents did speak in favor of the contract, several residents spoke against it.One resident who identified himself as Joe Brown was not satisfied with DiPietro’s presentation of the budget. “I have to be honest, I’m real confused,” he said. “That’s a lot of information. It looks to me like there is a lot of fluff in the teachers’ salaries with the step increases and I don’t think you’re giving us an accurate picture.”DiPietro did not explain the step increases. “You’re amazingly disrespectful, Mr. Brown,” he said. “You’re accusing me of giving you incorrect information and I am not, these are the numbers.”
The school committee was interested in questions, Patenaude added. “If you have a question, we’ll answer it. Your opinions are not what we are interested in. If you want to stay for public comment you may do so.”Brown requested that the school committee try one more time to go back and get further concessions from the union.“Mr. Brown,” Patenaude responded. “We have met with the unions and we have done our job.”“So you’re satisfied?” Brown asked.“Yes,” Patenaude responded. The answer to the request of more concessions would be “no,” said President of the Coventry Teachers’ Alliance Kelly Erinakas after Brown’s question.“The school committee did what they were asked to and negotiated,” she said. “So did the Coventry Teachers’ Alliance. Members are giving up $2,700 each next year. That’s a lot out of anyone’s pocket and no, you cannot get more.”
Town Republican Committee Chair Charles Vacca asked for a figure of the cost of this contract over the next few years.Coming up with a specific number of the cost involves too many factors, DiPietro told him. The contract will cost an additional $1 million more in health care alone, and many other things will weigh in. Entering a contract without knowing the financial forecast of the town concerned him, Vacca said. “This whole system has a pitfall where we enter into contracts before we know what funds we will have.”
Having closed discussion, the school committee voted unanimously to accept the contract. Yesterday morning, Patenaude was still satisfied with the new contract, she said. “The people who really have their ear to the ground so to speak on what’s going on with contracts in the town knew the details already because we had shared them with the town council the day before,” she said. “[Council President Raymond Spear] showed up and didn’t have any questions, we certainly didn’t get any other calls from people saying ‘what are you thinking?’ And [Councilman] Frank Hyde came to the meeting and commended us for signing the contract.”
Monday, June 1, 2009
Meetings
Land Trust 6/2:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4244/2009/74733.pdf
Tax Assessment Review Board 6/2:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4236/2009/74736.pdf
Zoning Board 6/3:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4234/2009/74273.pdf
Library Board 6/3:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4245/2009/74517.pdf
Board of Canvassers June 8th:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4237/2009/74532.pdf
The FTM is now scheduled for June 30th.
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4244/2009/74733.pdf
Tax Assessment Review Board 6/2:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4236/2009/74736.pdf
Zoning Board 6/3:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4234/2009/74273.pdf
Library Board 6/3:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4245/2009/74517.pdf
Board of Canvassers June 8th:
http://www2.sec.state.ri.us/omfiling/pdffiles/notices/4237/2009/74532.pdf
The FTM is now scheduled for June 30th.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)