The amount of money that could be saved with the closing of Marks Meadow, not including the cost of moving the two portable classrooms currently located there (According to the document "Reconfiguration Options--Current Understanding 2.10.09" which I got at the School Committee meeting of that date but could not find on-line.). If these portables had to be moved to accomodate students in one of the other three elementary schools, the amount of money that could be saved would be $406,000 with $671,000 being the estimated savings in Year 2. Costs that, as I understand it, would be primarily personnel as UMass pays for the utilities at Marks Meadow. And since the majority of the costs for Marks Meadow is personnel, these costs would increase between 3.5% and 5% per year based on the current contracts.
Apparently closing Marks Meadow would result in four fewer classroom teachers for the Elementary District, one fewer each principal, secretary, ELL teacher, special ed teacher, intervention teacher, nurse, librarian, and therapeutic para as well as 1.5 fewer custodial FTEs and 1.13 fewer paraprofessional FTEs.
The voices for and against closing Marks Meadow have been public and insistent so I won't repeat those arguments here. I did want to comment on a thoughtful argument I heard by Nick Yaffe, current principal of Marks Meadow, during the December meeting of the short-lived Amherst Elementary Reorganization Committee, of which I was a member. He urged delay in considering the closing of Marks Meadow in the face of potential discussions of regionalization of our entire K-12 system. That made sense to me, since why would we potentially want to move our kids twice in a relatively short amount of time if we didn't have to?
So even though I was in support of closing Marks Meadow for fiscal reasons, this comment by Nick Yaffe did stick in my mind. Then I read the article by Nick Grabbe in the Bulletin this past week where regionalization was the topic and the current model apparently under discussion (the article reports Andy Churchill saying) was the identification of both Marks Meadow and the Pelham School as "more likely candidates for closure" under a K-12 regional model. So, in my mind, if the regionalization team is considering closing Marks Meadow under that model, that removes the one bit of doubt I may have had about whether or not closing Marks Meadow makes sense next year. Difficult, yes, I won't argue with that. But perhaps financially necessary to maintain a good quality education for all our elementary students.
The Elementary School Committee meets tomorrow, 7PM in the Middle School cafeteria to discuss the budget and whether or not the closing of Marks Meadow has been taken off the table. At the last round of budget talks (March 3rd), the lists of cuts and additions was presented without any mention of how the potential closing of Marks Meadow fit into the financial picture. Superintendent Geryk said that she and the four principals did not recommend closing the school at this time. Catherine Sanderson asked what among those cuts might be saved with the closing of Marks Meadow. I hope our budget folks have preared that answer for her. Anyone with interest not only in the budget for our elementary schools but also in the future of Marks Meadow should consider attending the meeting tomorrow to find out what the update is.
14 comments:
In the agreement between UMass and Amherst, I seem to remember that if Marks Meadow is closed UMass agreed to make a yearly cash payment to the Town. Is that included in the cost savings? UMass would actually like to have the building back.
Anon 9:12AM: Yes, you are right about Amherst and UMass having reached an agreement about paying for the ~50 kids living tax-exempt on the UMass campus if the town were to close Marks Meadow! I forgot about that. That is a great point and would potentially add to the savings associated with its closing, thus also helping address our long-term gap between revenue and expenditures.
Hi Alison,
the meeting tonight is in the middle school cafeteria and not the HS library???
Abbie: That is correct--the cafeteria at ARMS. At least according to an announcement I got from the middle school parent association. I checked and it is also listed there on the ARPS web site. I am sure many people will go to the ARHS library--I hope someone posts signs there.
I think it is a sad state of affairs when poeple in power look at money instead of those that will be hurt when MM closes.
Attemtping to recoup money that was midhandled in the first place, I mean how else can one explain the shortfall in the elementary budget???, is unacceptable when our kids have to suffer the consquences.
Alison--you think this will be a smart move????
Can't believe everything you read in the Bulletin (surprise?) -- check out the actual Strategic Agreement online at my old website:
Strategic Part UMass 082307 pgs 3-4, 8;
It says they'll talk to us, it doesn't say they'll pay us. I am quite certain that in these times they are not going to be able to pay us anything for at least two years. There's also no precedent for this happening in Massachusetts, since UMass isn't a private organization like Amherst College, etc.
Also available on the UMass website:
News Release 20070824
to anonymous @5:23:
If you haven't noticed we are in a profound recession- that's the PRIMARY reason for the big budget shortfall.
If you are going to be so scathing in your remarks, why not leave your name instead of being anonymous?
Anon 5:23PM: Yes, I do think closing Marks Meadow is a good idea because our School Committee needs to do what is best for ALL our kids, not just the kids at Marks Meadow. Again, I didn't say it was a decision that would be (or should be) easily made, but looking at the data, it is my opinion that it is a long-term strategic good move.
Alisa: thanks for posting the original copy of the Strategic Agreement--I looked for it on the Town web site but couldn't find it. It is good to read the exact text. You are right that there is not any exact dollar amount set and also right that UMass is also facing budget difficulties, but with the agreement in place, it will at least offer the Town a good position from which to begin negotiating payment.
Abbie: yes, the failing economy has definitely affected our current budget gap but it was already in place and growing even before this latest financial crisis. The national economic situation has just made it worse.
Hi Alison,
yes, prop 2.5 will always be limiting. That's where the structural deficit comes from. The fact is that each year running costs typically increase by more than 2.5%. Closing MM won't change the limits of prop 2.5 but it does make it MORE possible to live within our means, which are constrained by prop 2.5.
FYI
At the SC Meeting this eveninng Catherine Sanderson made a motion that if approved will close Marks Meadow at the end of the NEXT school year giving a full year to figure out the implementation issues.
Interesting to note that the two new SC members (TBD) will be voting on this issue, not the two members stepping down from the SC.
Abbie: Yes, Prop 2.5 is a huge part of the problem and something that many people don't realize we are constrained by. I should do a separate blog on this. Thanks for the idea!
Anon 9:42PM: Yes, anyone who is interested can read a summary of the meeting on Catherine's blog. Although Catherine has long been a proponent of closing Marks Meadow at the end of this academic year, her motion lays out excellent reasons for making the decision NOW but delaying the implementation of that decision until the end of 2009-2010. And since our new School Committee members will be voting on this motion (glad all three were at the meeting last night), that makes it all the more vital that everyone take time to get to know the candidates and then to vote on March 31st!
Hi Abbie,
I seem to have taken notice of this 'recession' we are in. Nice--to fall back on this as an explanation for the shortfall in our elementary school budget, but I just don't buy it. I left last night's meeting and threw-up in the parking lot before I got in my car. It was that sickening. When hours of our time are taken up by verbal battering or comedic remarks it's enough to make anyone ill.
The money is there Abbie, as Irv Rhodes stated. And I believe it always has been. Now it is up to a knowledgable person to apply in a grant seeking form and get it for once and for all.
Closing Marks Meadow--punishing our community, is not the answer. Because you see when one says 'not just Marks Meadow kids' it doesn't make sense. If you are talking about ALL kids on the one hand and MM kids on the other--you are spliting them yourself. MM kids are ALL kids. What you do to hurt one child, you are doing to hurt all children!
Scathing?--I just call it unmasked honesty. Thank you.
The university won't pay anyting, given 2 years to think about it, they will do the same thing with North Village that they did when Lead Paint was discovered in Lincoln Apartments -- kick all the parents with small children out.
Right now someone with a child has a priority to move into North Village, the university can just as easially prioritize those without children. And then all the expenses for supporting these young parents get taken from the university and UMPD and given to the town and the APD because the graduate students would be living in Presidential or Puffton instead.
Furthrmore, the agreement was with John Lombardi who was fired and is now down in Louisana. The promise is to "talk about" and the answer is going to be "no."
On the other hand, the Town did agree to repair/maintain the school building, and sooner or later the state inspector is going to demand that be done. This will be far more expensive than you think because union contracts will require it be done by UM Physical Plant employees so you can budget three times market and still be shocked...
Post a Comment