April 10, 2008 06:42 am The Gloucester School Committee has unanimously demanded a budget increase of 4.3 percent — an increase it says it needs just to keep "treading water," or simply to maintain the programs and services it provides now. That is a problem — a very big problem. It is a problem because the proposed spending plan of $36.6 million is a half-million dollars more than Mayor Carolyn Kirk says is available to the schools for the coming fiscal year. Kirk is trying to get control of the city's finances, and if the School Committee refuses to live within the limits set by the mayor, every other department will be inclined to do the same. It is also a problem because it shows that the School Department has a structural deficit. It has built cost increases into its contracts with employees that exceed the rate of inflation. If unchecked, this means the department will need an increase every year that exceeds the cost of living — and that will not work as this cash-strapped city moves forward, even with reforms. That means voters would have to approve an override every year to keep pace with that demand — and that's hard to imagine at this point as well. To talk, as committee members did Monday night, of having no more room for "further cuts" is both misleading and Orwellian. Clearly, if the committee were to abide by the limit set by the mayor, it would not be suffering a budget cut at all from the current year. It would still have an increase of 2.8 percent — more in line with inflation and still generous, given the fiscal straits of the city. If committee members truly believe that education — as in services to "the children" — will be harmed by living within the mayor's budget, they should go back to the bargaining table with teachers and other staff. If everybody's interests are truly aimed at serving children, then teachers and others should be willing to make modest sacrifices in their contract terms to preserve those services. When school committees or unions are demanding more from taxpayers, they generally invoke "the children," as if higher salaries or better benefits for adults are providing services to students. "Children are our future," taxpayers are also told. And that is true — they are. But the committee will do those children no favors to present them with unaffordable education budgets when they reach adulthood and have to start paying the bills. And it's frankly hard to see how the step raises many teachers get on top of annual pay hikes and the generous benefit packages they enjoy really benefit "the children." A 2.8 percent increase is not a cut. The School Committee should find a way to live with that — for the sake of today's taxpayers, and for the children who will be tomorrow's taxpayers as well.
—
Copyright © 1999-2008 cnhi, inc.