Council questions school spending at budget hearing

School administrators and the School Committee were faced with questions and lecturing by members of the City Council Friday at the first 2017-18 fiscal budget hearing.

Mayor Scott Avedisian’s $310 million budget proposes $165 million for schools, approximately $3.1 million more than the previous year. Set aside is $2.4 million for a contract agreement with the Warwick Teachers Union. Superintendent Philip Thornton’s budget, approved earlier in the year by the School Committee, comes in at $167 million.

Thornton and Chief Budget Officer Anthony Ferrucci began the hearing with a presentation before being questioned by the Council. Council members acknowledged they have no control over where the school department spends its money once budgeted, but said they still had expectations to some extent.

“We have no need to know how many light bulbs you’ll purchase,” said Council President Joe Solomon. “What we do have to know is that any money we appropriate will be spent responsibly and not just responsibly but in a way that the taxpayers expect it to be spent.”

Councilwoman Donna Travis questioned the use of 3 administration buildings while pointing out heating and sewage problems at Warwick Vets, fire alarm issues at Norwood and Holliman, and other recent issues inside school buildings.

“I find it really outrageous that we actually can sit here with the mayor giving them extra money and yet the same thing is still said ‘if we don’t get that $1.7 [million], we’re going to cut.’ And every time they say cut, it affects the teachers, it affects the students’ programs. And I am so sick of hearing that every, every year,” Travis said. “We have no say in this but it’s aggravating.”

Thornton said the department is looking to re-purpose the Gorton building as the district’s sole administration building, which would result in a “savings” for the city. He expects the Warwick Avenue administrative offices to be turned back to the city by the end of this summer.

Finance Chair Ed Ladouceur spoke similarly to Travis.

“I particularly wrestle with sitting here year after year after year with you coming to the City Council and telling us what you need because of what you don’t have and then shortly after the new fiscal year begins, we deal with what you found,” he said. “That’s difficult for me to take a look at a request of an additional $4 million when I don’t know what you have. And it seems to me that… at least as we sit here today, you don’t know what you have.”

Thornton and Ferrucci were also met with criticism for laying off teachers (31 were sent notices, but some may be called back depending on final funding allocations) but no administrators. Councilman Tim Howe even accused them of speaking about teachers as a “line item” in a “degrading” tone.

Thornton had previously stated that he believes the school department is appropriately staffed at the administration level after a consultant did a reorganization of that department last year.

Thornton also explained that the layoffs were made based on “potential of being level funded this upcoming year” and that law requires the notices to be sent before June 1.

“If we didn’t lay off any personnel, it greatly limits what you can do fiscally from year to year,” he said, continuing to explain that the layoffs were contingent upon final budget allocations though Councilman Richard Corley called this fact “not very comforting.”

Councilman Steve Merolla brought up funding that’s been historically given to the schools, saying that over 9 years, the community gave them $4 million more.

“If we look at how much we’ve given to the city side of the budget, you’d get nauseated…When I look at the historical spending that’s gone to [the school] side of the budget, what did they do? They had to cut 8,9 buildings over 10 years, over 200 employees,” he said. “We’re adding employees on the city side. So I just don’t want to get so enthusiastic about pointing out the mistakes that they’re making that the impression is that they have too much money and we should be cutting their funding. When I hear the words surplus,’ ‘too much administrative staff,’ that tells me they have too much. What I think we’re trying to say is in our opinion, they should re-appropriate it differently… but I don’t think that they have too much.”

During a short public comment session toward the end of the nearly two and a half hour hearing, one school reading specialist made her case for the School Committee approved budget of $167 million, “respectfully” asking the Council to approve of it as well.

“With over 45 students receiving reading services in our school alone, the potential cuts could have a detrimental impact on our community. It would logistically be impossible for only one reading specialist to…provide reading support to all students in need,” she said.

City budget hearings will continue tonight at 5 p.m. at City Council Chambers.