RTM Education Committee Budget Report FY 2020-21: Submitted June 5, 2020

RTM Education Committee Budget Report FY 2020-21: Submitted June 5, 2020

Your Education Committee met to vote on Item 3: the FY 2020-21 Budget on Monday, June 1, 2020. The Education Committee considers and votes on operating and capital budgets for the Board of Education, the Libraries, the Bruce Museum and parts of the Departments of Public Works, Parks and Recreation, and Health as they relate to the schools. We also consider the school lunch revolving fund, budget resolutions related to the schools and libraries, and the borrowing authorization for capital projects, including those related to the BOE.

As in prior years, our coverage of the budget began in November as the Superintendent presented her proposed budget to the Board of Education. During our December, January, March, May and June meetings we heard presentations and updates from the BOE on the status of their budget. At our May meeting we had budget presentations from Greenwich Library and The Bruce Museum. Due to the Covid-19 Pandemic, we gave departments the option of submitting budget information via email. The Perrot Library, DPW, Parks and Rec, and Department of Health (special clinical/hygienists) all submitted budget information to us via email. Members of our committee took on liaison roles with individual schools, the libraries, and The Bruce. Each liaison met with the school building or department leaders to prepare a more in-depth report on their budgets. These are appended at the end of this report. Please realize that most interviews were completed before the BET’s budget was finalized, and the information contained in them may have changed.

The budgets of all departments changed significantly from the time the BET budget committee voted in March to the time the full BET submitted a budget to the RTM in May. Due to the uncertainty surrounding the Covid-19 pandemic, the BET passed a budget in May that held all departments operating budgets flat for next year and cut many capital projects.

All departments but the Board of Education reported that they believe they will be able to manage to provide a similar level of services next year with a flat operating budget. The Board of Education, however, has said that a flat budget will require them to make significant cuts to programs. They are still developing a plan for how they will do this.

The BOE operating budget recommended to the RTM by the BET in May is $163.4 million. The budget proposed by the BOE and approved by the BET budget committee in March was $166.6 million. The proposed budget kept to the original BET guidelines of a 2% increase. Because their contractual salary obligations were estimated at a $2.4 million dollar increase, the BOE had already submitted a budget that involved cutting close to $1 million from its prior year’s budget. For at least the second year in a row, the BOE submitted a budget that did not maintain level services in order to meet BET guidelines. In addition, by March, when the BET budget committee passed the proposed budget, it became clear that the BOE also had a budget shortfall of approximately $1.5 million this year related to special education settlements and outplacements. This shortfall is expected to continue for the next budget year as well. As a result, the BOE budget approved by the BET is approximately $4.5 million less than would be required to deliver the already reduced services proposed by the BOE. On the capital budget, many of the most controversial BOE items were removed from the budget by the BET. The BOE had proposed a capital budget of $35.8 million. The BET approved a capital budget of $16.4 million. Items removed or reduced include money for the Central Middle School fields; soil remediation at Western Middle School; the final phase of Cardinal Stadium, funds to continue A&E work for Julian Curtiss; and the installation of dishwashers at each school. The final capital budget includes $100k for a special education study; $1.4m for digital learning; $3.6m for Cardinal Stadium; $110k for feasibility work on renovations to Old Greenwich Elementary; and $250k to continue feasibility/A&E work on security-related changes to the GHS enrtryway. The capital budget also includes $875k in capital items for Greenwich Library, which is undergoing significant renovations, and $75k for ceiling tile replacement at Perrot Library. The Bruce Museum, which is also undergoing major renovation, will receive $125k for security upgrades.

We voted against approving the Schools/Board of Education Operating Budget with a vote of 4- 7-1 (D1, 2, 7 and 8 voted Yes; D5 abstained). As a point of clarification, there was no motion made to reduce this item (which is the only way to have a separate vote on a line item at the full RTM meeting).

Those voting Yes cited the following reasons: they felt the budget was adequate for our needs; they respect the judgment of the BET as our elected officials; they believe it's critical for the BOE to have a baseline budget in place now even if it isn't sufficient and are supportive of additional appropriations once the BOE has figured out what it needs; they believe that ongoing labor negotiations need to be progressed because it's irresponsible to support $2.7 million in salary increases when unemployment is at its highest levels in years; they don't like to use their vote simply as protest; they don't like the position the town would be in if we don't approve a budget.

Two members voted No because they believe that the budget is too high. One said they believe there is "No acknowledgement by the district of the abundance of excess K-5 capacity in our schools, improving facility usage planning, and preparing for an era of forecasted declining enrollment." The other disagrees with how the money is being spent, "The increase Dr. Jones

asks for is mostly for wages and doesn’t go towards the students. Further, the principals and

teachers have not been asked to come to the table to figure out how we can deliver a better educational product in the fall."

The other five No votes, oppose the budget because they believe it is too low. They feel that this budget doesn't represent the needs of schools or stated desires of constituents. Some wish that BOE and BET could meet in the middle and come together on this. They feel it's important to send a message to the BET that they should be listening to the people of the town and support the schools. They are upset that the BET changed the budget after the period of public comment, and would not open discussion up again even after receiving over 1,000 emails and a protest was held outside of town hall. They are concerned about putting BOE employees out of work and "want Greenwich to be the kind of town that shows some loyalty to their employees. All of this for savings in the neighborhood of $150 per family." They are concerned that " Funding for

schools has been marginal for years. We’ve already cut teacher education programs, now we’re

cutting media people during a time of distance learning. We've gone through a ridiculous number of Superintendents already. Don't do this to the new one."

The member who Abstained said that they are opposed to this budget but don't want to see the BET budget go into effect either and chose to abstain because they weren't sure how to voice this view.

We approved all remaining appropriations referred to the Education Committee with a vote of 12-0-0. These include:

Operating Appropriations:

• 315 • 410 • 440 • 701 • 702 • 710 • 801
DPW-- BOE Operating projects done by DPW (page 6) Health / Special Clinical (page 7) External Entities--Contribution to Bruce Museum (page 7) Greenwich Library (page 9) Peterson Wing (page 9) Perrot Memorial Library (page 9) Parks and Recreation Administration (page 9)

Capital Appropriations:

• 315 • 440 • 680 • 701 • 710 • 822
DPW – BOE Projects done by DPW (page 13) Bruce museum capital (page 14) Board of Education (page 14) Greenwich Library (page14) Perrot Memorial Library (page 14) Parks and Recreation--Pks/Play/Fields (pages 14-15)

Revolving Funds:

• 670

School Lunch Fund (page 18 )

Resolutions:

• 43-46 • 47-48
Board of Education (pages 32-33) Libraries (page 34)

• Additional

Borrowing Authorization (pages 38-39)

RTM Education Committee Liaison Budget Reports: May, 2020

D1, Robert Robins: D1, Andrea Anthony: D2, Erika Wilson: D2, Michele Klosson: D3, Steven P. Rubin: D3 Louise Bavis: D4, Alex Popp:
NA Julian Curtiss Central Middle School Bruce Museum Havemeyer, Hamilton Avenue Hamilton Avenue New Lebanon

D4, Ryan Smith:

New Lebanon

D5, Joan Thakor: D5, Hale McSharry:

D6, Barbara O’Neill:

D6, Janet McGuigan: D7, Kim Blank:
Riverside ISD Old Greenwich Perrot Library Cos Cob, Havemeyer Eastern Middle School Greenwich Library North Street Bruce Museum Western Middle School Glenville
D7, Liz Perry: D8, Jennifer Freitag: D8, Janet McMahon: D8, Barbara Oxer: D9, Abbe Large: D9, Seth Bacon: D10, Mareta Hamre: D10, Natalie Adee: D11, Susan Fahey: D11, Adam Leader: D12, Mary Flynn:
Western Middle School Greenwich High School Greenwich High School Parkway North Mianus
D12, Paula Mickley Legere: Central Middle School

Havemeyer—GPS Central Administration

•••••

Steve Rubin (D3) and Kim Blank (D7) met with Superintendent, Dr. Toni Jones, and COO,

Sean O’Keefe on Wednesday, March 4.

At the time of the meeting all were becoming concerned that the schools may need to close due to Covid, but no plans had yet been made Since our meeting, we believe that Dr. Jones has looked at reducing these costs in particular

as they may have less direct impact on next year’s classroom

In early May she announced the members of the cabinet will forego their contractual salary increases for the coming year At our March meeting she talked about already planned ways to reduce costs at Havemeyer including two frozen positions; reducing HR dept from director and assistant to just a director of HR; moving positions from central office into schools (e.g., moving instructional coach from central office to EMS)

•

Was also looking at ways to reduce cost of summer school by consolidating at a single site, but these plans are likely in flux due to Covid

Greenwich High School

RTM Education Committee - Greenwich High School Liaison Report
2020-2021 Greenwich Public Schools Proposed Budget

School:

Greenwich High School - Meeting Tuesday February 24, 2020 10am. This report was written

after the meeting and before the March 13, 2020 when schools closed due to COVID-19. No new information was submitted by BOE to GHS re: budget at this time.

Susan Fahey, Natalie Adee

Reviewed By: Attendees:

GHS Headmaster Ralph Mayo, Assistant Headmaster Mr. Richard Piortrzkowski, GHS PTA Co-President Maureen Bonanno, and Terry Lamanti by phone

GHS Facts:

Building

Sq ft Original Build

Age

Grades

Greenwich High

454,500

1970

50

9-12

Greenwich High School w/CC

Greenwich High School is the town’s principle

public high school and a diverse community with approximately 2,752 students this 2019-2020 school year. Enrollment is expected to increase by 3.4% (~95 students) by next fall to 2,847. The 2020 graduation class is the largest senior class in ten years. Enrollment is expected to grow steadily over the next few years and reach ~3,000 by the

Total

2752

%
2019-2020 Current Students

of which F/R

21%
12.5%
3.3%

576 344
83 of which SPED of which ESL/ELL

2020-2021 Projected

2847

2022 – 2023 school-year. The student body speaks more than 29 languages and represents 57 countries. The students reflect the wider district with 71% identified as white, 23% Hispanic/Latino, 3% mixed, and 3% Black. Compared to last year, English Second Language is flat at about 3%, Special Education is up about .5% to 12.5%, and Free and/or Reduced Lunch students has by in large stayed the same at about 21%.

Operating Budget:

The BOE did not break out the opertaing budget for GHS on a standalone basis. The proposed 2020- 2021 Operating Budget for the district is $166,631,476 and represents a 2.0 % or $3,295,483 increase over the current year’s budget and adhered to the BET 2% budget guideline. Contractual salaries will add appproximately $2.4 million to the FY 19-20 budget and acounts for 63% increase of the districts year over year budget. The supplies budget is considered adequate at this time.

Observations:

There is again little flexibility in the teacher side of the operating budget as it is largely based on a formula of students to FTE, which has recently been adjusted from 15.6:1 to 16.0:1 just as enrollment is projected to increase. Greenwich has historically built out our capacity ahead of projected need; however, given the recently adjusted higher FTE:student ratio and higher increased enrollment projections, they are concerned that lagging resources could negatively inpact learning. This incoming freshman class has increased grad requirements and will have sections above the 24 guideline cap.

The Greenwich BOE FY20-21 recommended Capital Improvement Plan totals $35.8M. For major projects (GHS $22.5M) and ($11.6M) reflects the maintenance projects and approximately 1.7M for technology

Capital Budget

•

New – Design Study for the Greenwich High School Entryway ($250K). As prioritized by the Board

of Education on June 14, 2018, the capital plan will include a design study for entry way at Greenwich High School. The concept reflects a new main entrance and includes a security vestibule. This does not include the media center section of this project.

•

Ongoing – GHS Cardinal Field Improvements ($8.1 million). The District completed a Cardinal Field

Feasibility Study during the FY17-18 academic year which culminated with the committee and town concurrence to pursue design work on Option B, a $21.3 project. This option included replacing the bleachers, improving field lighting and the speaker system, adding a through road, relocating the tennis courts and adding a building serving as the ticket gate and facilities complete with ADA accessible bathrooms, team rooms, a referee and medical care room. The board approved the continuation of the design phase on Option B on February 22, 2018. On January 16, 2020 the BOE took action on the redesign of Cardinal Stadium to amend Option B previously voted on in 2018 and brought the project down to $18.7M. The approved new design will require 8.1 M in funding in FY20-21 .

•

Greenwich High School Environmental Analysis (250K)

The Window and Door project for GHS had originally been planned as a replacement project that would be completed in phases depending on availability of each separate wing during summer months. During design phase it was discovered that new caulk and sealant between the frames was needed. Due to PCBs in this area there will now need to be abatement in this area and the project will need to include those costs.

Greenwich High School Soil

Working in partnership with the Town’s Department of Public Works, environmental testing and

remediation activities have occurred during school breaks (winter, spring, summer) to the extent possible. This has resulted in a timeline that may be extended more than would be expected for a

Remediation Project

remediation project at a typical industrial or commercial site where work can be performed throughout the year. Throughout the environmental testing and remediation process, the Town of Greenwich (the Town) has engaged the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (CTDEEP), the Connecticut Department of Public Health (CTDPH), as well as local boards and commissions to communicate ongoing testing activities and testing results. The Town with the State worked on additional site investigation, minor remediation and athletic field repairs, which occurred in August and October of 2019. A Radical Action Remediation Plan or RAD was prepared and submitted and the next phase of remediation is planned for summer of 2020. Phase 1 plan at GHS will focus on supporting renovation to athletic fields 6 and 7.

Update: Areas of Concern Yielding Strongest Support
Other areas of concern are things relating to basic building repairs and safety as follows:

SAFETY It has been pointed out that our glass corridor creates a very unsafe environment to our students and staff especially while they are passing. The security desk is already inside the corridor allowing for entry prior to being approved to come into our building. Plans include extra glass box in front of that for security. This needs to be maintained in capital budget.

DEFERRED MAINTENANCE There is quite a bit of maintenance that needs to be done around the building. We will be revisiting our tools for schools teams to create a new punch list of items. Things such as hardware on doors and windows are all deteriorating.

PROACTIVE CONTROLS Given the costly water leaks the district has recently experienced, it seems appropriate to look into water sensors and service contracts for major systems to avoid or detect problems.

OPERATIG BUDGET - Concerns around the operating budget continue to be the reduction in the FTE from 15.6-1 to 16:0-1. It has already increased class sizes. With increased graduation requirements, coupled with the expected large enrollment increase it will push up against our GEA contract caps and not allow offerings in basic classes. The current school year has already seen students unable to fit electives and even language courses into their schedule due to reduction in course offerings and times because of new ratio.

STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTED DATA DISTRICT WIDE STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTED DATA FOR HIGH SCHOOL

Student Academic Learning Outcomes

1a. GROWTH: The percentage of students in the Class of 2021 who meet or exceed projected academic growth scores based on the ECRISS Growth Model will increase by 3% (from 86.2% to 88.7%) over the percent of students in the Class of 2020 who met or exceeded growth scores. 1b. GROWTH:. 80% of identified low propensity students in the Class of 2021 who meet or exceed projected academic growth scores based on the ECRISS Growth Model will increase by at least 5%.

2. BENCHMARK:

•

The percentage of students in grade 11 who meet or exceed CT standards in EBRW as measured by the grade 11 CT School Day SAT will increase by 3% from 82.6 to 85.1%.

•

The percentage of students in grade 11 who meet or exceed CT standards in Math as measured by the grade 11 CT School Day SAT will increase by 3% from 64.9 to 66.8%

3. Advanced Placement Exams: The percentage of seniors who take and pass (with a score of 3 or higher) at least one AP test during their four years of high school will improve by 3% (from 60.2 % to 62.0%).

•

AP Courses (29)

•••••

AP Students Tested: 874 ( 2nd highest in 5 years) AP Exams: 2209 ( 15 year high) AP Students w/scores of 3+: 805 (5 year high) % of total AP students w/ 3+: 92.0 % (2nd highest in last 5 years ) Mean AP Score: 3.82 ( 3rd highest in last 10 years)

••

Early College Experience UCONN

••

GHS offers 9 different ECE UCONN courses Students enroll in over 175 ECE UCONN courses

National Merit Scholars

•••

Commended (31) Scholarship Qualified (14) National Hispanic Recognition Program (9)

•

GHS MATH TEAM

10 consecutive Fairfield County Math League championships

2020 SAT Results

•

Math All students Meets/Exceeds 66 % ELA All students Meets/Exceeds 83 % Math High Needs students Meets/Exceeds 25.2 %

ELA High Needs students Meets/Exceeds 55.5 %

Points of Pride: from Natalie Adee

WELLNESS CENTER

The mission of the Greenwich High School Educational and Wellness Center (The Center) is to provide high quality comprehensive services to students in therapeutic and structured surroundings in order to support positive mental-health and academic outcomes.

The Center provides coordinated on-site services to GHS students including mental health,

academic, behavioral, and social-emotional supports. The Center’s focus is to provide students

who are currently experiencing social/emotional and academic difficulties the wrap around

services needed to be successful learners. The Center’s wrap around services include direct

academic interventions, social-emotional and behavioral supports, individual and group therapy, on-site community agency providers, parent workshops, and staff development.

ROOTS AND SHOOTS and COMMUNITY SERVICE PROJECTS

This youth inspired program promotes the idea of making the world a better place for people, animals, and the environment.

UNIFIED SPORTS

Since starting the program in 2010, this academic year has attracted one the largest and most diverse groups of students with and without mild to profound disabilities with an average of 35- 40 participants attending on a weekly basis. We've expanded our means of social networking and advertising by creating an Instagram account as a way to communicate upcoming practice and tournament information as well as communal events that align with our program's philosophies, and to display some of our most memorable times together throughout the year such as taking part in the GHS homecoming parade, two charity events at Tod's Point, and a gratitude card collection that was recently delivered to the healthcare providers at Greenwich Hospital during COVID 19. We're currently in the process of putting together a "gratitudevideo" to be sent to related service providers in our community.