Worcester School Committee: honors for those improving grounds!

We're starting our meeting tonight by honoring the members of the Quinsig Village Advisory Committee, who enabled the building of a new playground at Quinsigamond School.
Councilor Clancy is announcing that they recently voted additional funds for capital improvements inside of Vernon Hill School and Quinsigamond School. (Hooray!)

We are also honoring District Attorney Early for the work he and his staff have done for improvements at schools around the district. (I should note that we got a list of the work that has been done and it went on for pages!)

And on last night's Council meeting

You'll remember that there were two items of school interest on the agenda:

• On the request to create a new revolving fund for Foley Stadium, it was sent, per motion by Councilor Clancy, to the Municipal Operations subcommittee.
• the North High status report was filed.

Plus, Councilor Petty had an item asking for a list of how the $44 million in capital funding was going to be spent. That came out of last week's School Committee meeting, and the mayor passed on the list to all the councilors. You can find it here, starting on page 40.

More on schools

I left at this point, but there were more remarks made by Council on schools. (start at 8:28)

Responses to the City Council

The communications last night to Council were as a result of the joint meeting of School Committee and City Council on November 10. At that meeting, Councilor Clancy asked a series of questions. These are the responses from the administration (you can find them in the attachments to last night's agenda).

college partnership list (made in December)

programs that provide services to CoW that are part of the curriculum

plans for set aside of stabilization funds

new Charter Schools: $3.4 mil first year; $6 mil after several years

reform efforts within budget of WPS

busing kids from WRTA: O'Connell stands to respond: question of bargaining for transporation for students (please include history from admin)

Clancy wants a list

Councilor Clancy is looking for a list of how much money Section 18 has saved the city.
He also quotes the EAW president as asking what good Section 19 would do if everyone is at 75/25.

Joint meeting

"Well, you have the questions...the answers you can have in April sometime," comments the Mayor in introducing the item.

Councilor Toomey says this needs to be an ongoing conversation...$26 to 28 million looming deficit...Boone meeting with groups of councilors..."as a body need to be working in a public fashion, being very transpartent" Need to "see a collaborative approach with each other" Meeting didn't accomplish anything in answers

Mayor thinks should have a meeting every month

Motion for City Clerk to contact School Committee clerk for a meeting in January

Toomey says "for several hours" ..."open communication...know that some of my colleagues" don't think it's necessary

Clancy rises for clarification. Doesn't want a new meeting yet..."our side was a very clear presentation; their side was all educational gobbledegook..." wait for answers before having another meeting..wait for those reports back from school department" (his questions are here)

Mayor says they are waiting for Governor's budget

Amended to wanting the answers prior to the January meeting

Add-ons on North High

There's a report on North High on the agenda tonight.
It's coming in on time and should be opening for fall of 2011. (I had this wrong last night)

Councilor Clancy wants to know who decides on the "add-ons" for the school; Commissioner Moylan says that he makes the final decision, keeping it "on time and on budget."
Clancy cites the Tech School, and six "other grammar schools" that have been rebuilt recently.

Councilor Palmieri wants to know if there are any other significant changes that will be taking place at North High. Moylan says no.
Staying within budget for FF&E; if there is more needed, it will need to be raised within the school budget or private funding. (Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment)"They have to go out and identify" other source of funds.
Says it's "almost 25 years late."

Comments from the members: Clancy

Five points from Councilor Clancy:

• reforms did not come easy on the city side this year. Send the schools a list
• stabilization funds. Do the schools have $ set aside? (note from the mayor-elect sitting next to me: schools can't save money from year to year)
• charter schools would cost $5 million if the 2 new ones get approved
• reform efforts: what are they on the school side?
• numbers are unsustainable for the future

Clancy says the message is that they want the city to live within their budget

Local option considered

I'm posting here from the City Council meeting, where they've just taken up the rejection by the state legislature of our local options. Councilor Clancy has asked that the Manager reapply as soon as possible (which, according to the Manager, is more or less this fall; we don't want to do it before then, as it can be rejected out of hand).
Councilor Smith is now going on at some length about his...disappointment. "You can't cut and not give us any options to do anything about it...there's no 'I' in 'team' and the state is the 'I' here."

Councilor Clancy

points out that he's already moved to pass the budget.
He also says he knows of three ways to balance budget:

• raise taxes
• cut more
• get more money from the state or fed, which isn't going to happen

Lauds for Loughlin and Mills now.

Deficit's down: CORRECTED

The big news from last night's presentation by Brian Allen at CPPAC: the deficit's down to $600,000 or so.
How?
The non-represented staff are taking at 25/75 split on health insurance (it happened in the city, so it happens in the schools).
And the health insurance is going up by only 8.5% instead of 10%. (That's the correction.)

You knew health insurance mattered!

Also, remember: the stimulus that's saving us this year only lasts for two years. We've got to start scrambling now to figure out what happens in 2012 when it runs out. If we don't, we're back to looking at those "hundreds of teachers" laid off that Councilor Clancy was warning about earlier in the year.

Liveblogging City Council: schedule of hearings: EDITED

April 7
April 14
April 28
May 5: WPS budget hearing


sorry, I can't type that fast...

Clancy asks if we can assume the final vote of the budget will take place on May 12...is it in the charter or state law? But we have 45 days to pass a budget. Clancy points out that we're leaving the schools until last, and having more than one department scheduled for that night; will we have time?
Budget hearings are at 6:30 (City Council is happening at 4:30 for the next several weeks).

Liveblogging City Council: Clancy

"a shame to see the trend of city services being reduced by some 500 positions over the past decade"
"reflects a great deal of uncertainty"
"what our parks will look like, what our youth will be doing in the summer..."

"to date, the City Manager has done a tremendous job with what he has at hand"

Liveblogging City Council: tax rate

Councilor Toomey is asking (under suspension) that we have an investigation (done by colleges, perhaps?) into moving to a single residential tax rate.
Councilor Clancy says "the last group" he wants looking at a single tax rate "is a college." Yes, that would be this evening's implicit mention of PILOT.
Councilor Toomey (to much muttering on the other side of the room) points out that WPI does, as a matter of course, studies (for the city among other groups)...that it's an intellectual exercise.
Councilor Petty asks that the information go to the working group put together by the Manager.
Councilor Palmieri also objects to the colleges having anything to do with it...and yet, they are the ones who DON'T have a dog in this fight, as we aren't asking about PILOT!
Clancy objects again...loudly this time.
Referring to committee voted down (that would be the committee that has yet to be appointed)
Sending it to a college is voted down

Liveblogging City Council: FY10 budget goes on the road?

And we're off on budget hearings and transparency...

9a.Request the City Council, in conjunction with the City Administration, consider establishing a series of three public hearings across the City relating to the Fiscal Year 2010 budget to provide maximum budget-related data to the general public and to receive maximum public input all modeled after the successful protocols implemented in the City of Portland, Oregon. Also, request that there be a comment section created on the City’s web site to allow immediate remote commentary as a result of these community hearings.

Councilor Toomey has proposed the motion, in the name of transparency.

Councilor Clancy says Council "unlike School Committee through the years" has met a number of times in an open, televised process..."I really think we do have an open transparent process." He comments that he likes the process as it is.

Clancy asks if we have a schedule for the budget hearings. The Manager answers that the budget is still waiting for final information on the application of federal stimulus money; he intended to have it ready this Friday...but now it's looking like it's going to be Tuesday instead. It will be presented with a budget summary this year, rather than a budget message as per usual.

Toomey says she's not asking to change the budget process, but to add meetings, hearings..."it doesn't have to be our budget session" She insists that the public be recognized, as not everyone can make the regular Council sessions.

Councilor Rosen notes that it's a suggestion.

Councilor Rushton calls the budget process "stale and unengaging...it may be tough at this point" He says we can engage the public...notes the governor goes online to engage the public..."it's here..." He speaks of the smart phones offered to the Councilors: "We've had a largely unengaged citizenry while the budget hearings are happening"

Councilor Eddy rises to "amend" after a reminder from the mayor that they may only rise for a limited number of reasons...he doesn't think the budget process is stale. He would like the subcommittees go out to hear public commentary on the budget.

Councilor Clancy suggests flip-flopping the budget hearings and the regular Council meeting: the meetings at 4, the hearings at 7.

Toomey says that it's a "hearing about the budget" not "a budget hearing," "away from City Hall." The various items pass for at least consideration.

City Council notes: apologies for the hold-up

I did not liveblog the Tuesday (3/3) City Council meeting, but I did take some notes on the budget. Tuesday's talk around the budget was largely a reaction to the presentation, just preceding the meeting, by the Massachusetts Taxpayers' Foundation, which then was repeated for the public at 7pm at South Community High.

The big news this week from the City Manager was the 75/25 split being taken by non-union employees. The Manager is determined on this one, and the numbers are stark:

• on the City side, a 75/25 split would save the City $2.35 million
• on the School side, the same split would save the City $3.4 million

On average, an employee would pay around $12 more a week with that change.

This is one where public opinion could really make a difference. There was a line tossed in last week's Clive McFarlane column by Dr. Mills referencing the teachers' union--"they eat their young." Speaking as a former MTA member, that isn't always true. But the numbers this year are going to come down, in many cases, to everyone paying $12 more a week for health insurance or laying off the newest of every profession. We already saw that happen with the police. Teachers are certainly going to have this happen next if the health insurance becomes a deal breaker.

The stark news from the presentation by the Taxpayers Association was that the Governor's budget appears to have been too rosy. According to the Manager, it looks like the Governor's budget has $1 billion that doesn't exist anymore. Thus his cuts in local aid don't go deep enough.

The Manager has intentionally not included the Emergency Relief bill in his calculations of the FY10 city budget, as we can't count on that money, as the bill hasn't passed yet. This led to Councilor Clancy asking for the Council to send a letter (per our delegation's request) to the Legislature, asking for them to pass the bill. The Mayor asked that the three portions of Emergeny Relief be dealt with separately (she doesn't support a meals tax). Councilor Eddy then held the item under privilege. That one won't move until next week. If you're wonder what the ER bill would do, it has three parts:

• "closing the telecom loophole" which would charge telephone companies taxes (in essence). For Worcester, this would mean an estimated $361,969
• a 1 cent meals tax, for Worcester would mean an estimated $2,780,336
• a 1 cent hotel/motel tax, for Worcester would mean an estimated $233,579

Councilor Petty gently urged the School Department to get moving on giving the city some numbers: "the more we know the better." He pointed out that the Council has been getting reports from the Manager "in depth." The only number anyone seems to have from the schools is the $18 million deficit given at last week's School Committee meeting.

Councilor Toomey asked the Manager what the given deficit is for the city if the city is level-funded, citing a school deparment number of $10 million on the school side. The Manager was clearly not thrilled about this question, saying that he thought the schools' number "may be oversimplified" but eventually gave a figure of between $9 and 11 million. This is what I cited below: given the same amount of income and no new budget items, there's automatically a deficit due to the increased cost of doing business from one year to the next.

Councilor Rosen repeated the line from the Taxpayers' Association: we should expect "thousands of teachers in Massachusetts to be laid off in the next few years."

Councilor Clancy on the tax rate

Councilor Clancy rises to support the lowest residential tax rate.

Clancy on Question 1

(you'll remember that Councilor Clancy asked for numbers on this back in July)

last July asked admin to forward what we might have as a budget if it passed
points out that it would matter for next year's budget (takes effect Jan 1, 2009)
educate taxpayers of ramification on next year's budget
close up shop the 2nd year

our state aid could be slashed 52% across the budget
(he's creating numbers here, based on 52%):
100 or more police officers
100 or more fire fighters
400-500 teachers not to mention support and transportation costs
doesn't include DPW
"draconian"

only option would be an across the board sales tax increase
(speaks here about costs that cannot be cut: payment of debt, plowing)

"We'd be afloat and on our own"
we rely so heavily on state aid
It's only fair that taxpayers know before they go to the polls
"significant ramifications"

"If we could get a more tangible list of the items we'd have to do without" then the voters would have more of an idea of what we're facing
(here cites the schools specifically, 'though he's also looking for specifics from the city)

Be careful what you vote for

There's been some online discussion of this already, but it looks as though the City Council isn't missing the impacts of the proposed rollback of the state income tax:

Item 12i. Request City Manager, in conjunction with the City Auditor and the Worcester Public Schools, prepare an impact report concerning public services that would result from the ballot initiative to eliminate the state income tax. (Clancy)

(live-posting from the City Council meeting)
Councilor Clancy says he wants projections..."we're a creature of the state. Our schools receive a tremendous amount of money from the state...that's going to have an impact...We at least have to roll out what that impact would be...certainly significant on the school side...far great repercussions on the school side."

The councilor stresses that he'd like conservative projections, saying the schools "like to have their finger on the scales sometimes."

(The proposal would rollback the tax 2 1/2 percent in 2009, and 2 1/2 in 2010.)

Crossing guards

Councilor Rushton, under suspension, is saying he's gotten a number of phone calls from parents of Our Lady of the Angels students who are concerned that their crossing guards are being cut. The mayor comments that the money hasn't been fully committed on the school side.

Councilor Clancy is very concerned as well..."I think all of us..we would hope that they would fund this" Makes a motion to restore all crossing guards to school budget.

ROLL CALL ON RESTORATION:

unanimously in favor