Niagara Wheatfield to return budget to voters

by Ralph Schwarz
Niagara Wheatfield Tribune, May 27, 2004

Recognizing the negative impact a revised budget would have in the school district for the years to come, the Niagara Wheatfield Board of Education decided unanimously at its May 19 meeting to present the original $52.04 million budget in next month's re-vote.

The board reached its decision after weighting the consequences of proposing a reduced budget or even a contingency budget for the 2004-05 school year.

"We are planning for the future," said Michael Murawski, the board's vice president. "I think we should not short-change the students who come here in four, eight or 10 years down the road."

Niagara Wheatfield voters defeated the proposed 2004-05 budget in last week's budget vote by a final count of 593 ballots cast in favor to 622 ballots cast against, making it the first time in almost 10 years that the budget failed.

The proposed budget included a 4.9 percent tax increase to cover increased costs caused by state mandates and employee/retirement benefits as well as increases in student enrollment without eliminating any educational programs or enlarging class sizes. The proposed tax increase would have resulted in an average tax rate of $20.43. The district currently operates on a $48.4 million budget with an property tax rate of $19.48.

"I'm not willing to go backward," said board member Carol Scholl. "We worked too hard to get where we are."

Other Options

According to District Business Executive Kerin Dumphrey, the school board also had the option of presenting the voters a reduced budget or operating on a contingency budget without a re-vote.

In his presentation to the board, Dumphrey recommended a budget below the contingency cap, which would have reduced the original proposal by $695,340, dropping the tax rate from 4.9 percent to 3.6 percent.

"This can be done by eliminating the extra positions that were budgeted due to anticipated increased enrollment," he said, adding this would mean cutting the positions for much-needed English and social studies teachers at the high school level.

With the original budget already defeated, adopting a contingency budget represented another alternative.

"According to state law, a contingency budget is required to be put into place after voters have not approved a budget," Dumphrey said. "However, this comes with restrictions."

Those restrictions would limit the budget to $51.5 million while creating a tax increase of 4.02 percent. Although the district could still fulfill its educational and contractual obligations under a contingency budget, it would eliminate all allocations for new equipment, primarily for the athletic programs, as well as the free use of school facilities by non-school and community groups.

"All non-Niagara Wheatfield activities would have to be fully charged for the use of our buildings and fields," Dumphrey said. "They are not part of our school program and, therefore, the state does not consider them as 'joined use agreements. ... The costs of heat, light and custodial work and supplies would have to be passed on to the parents and the children in these programs."

Non-School Groups Affected

Groups affected by the contingency budget would include the Latchkey Program, Girl and Boy Scouts, recreational programs held by the towns of Niagara and Wheatfield, Niagara Wheatfield Athletic Association, Niagara Wheatfield Sports Alliance, Falcon Aquatics, Lions and Rotary clubs, and parents organizations that utilize the school buildings for their meetings and programs.

"It's not a good picture being on a contingency budget," Board President Maureen Kaus said. "It will certainly upset people when they have to pay extra fees for programs. I think it's important to keep the buildings open to the public."

District Superintendent Dr. Judith Howard recommended to present voters the original budget again.

"We recommend a re-vote, just to get out of that state of mind that a contingency budget brings," she said.

Still, Howard cautioned the board members against a possible voter backlash for putting up the initial budget.

"We have to be prepared for whatever happens," she said. "There are a lot of things going in that we cannot control. I don't know how we can handle increased enrollment when the state reduces funding. When there is declining enrollment, you can cut teaching. Unfortunately, we're not in a situation to do that."

Re-Vote Date Set

The school district will hold a re-vote on Thursday, June 17, from 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. in the lobby of West Street Elementary School, 5700 Saunders Settlement Road, Sanborn.

With the original budget failing by 29 votes and participation dropping from 1,338 voters in 2003 to 1,211 this year, board members look for an increased turnout from the approximately 17,000 eligible voters.

"What happened [last week] is that less than 5 percent of the population determined that we don't have a budget," Murawski said. "If this happens again and we have a contingency budget, then everybody will be up in arms about it."

Murawski reminded the parents and students attending the board meeting that all residents who are American citizens and 18 years or older, can vote as long as they are able to produce a valid driver's license.

"I'm not asking people to "yes" or "no" but to come out and vote," he said.

The school board will re-adopt the budget originally proposed for 2004-05 at its next meeting on Wednesday, June 2.