3rd school budget ballot vote is set
The results of a third town meeting last night on a fiscal 2007 school budget mirrored the previous two town meetings: Action was again deferred to a referendum.
The town meeting last night was called for voters to consider a $14.675 million school budget. Shortly after Moderator Robert G. Viens called the session to order, he announced that it would be held for discussion purposes only. He said Town Clerk Sara Seney had certified a petition to place the budget on a referendum ballot. A certified petition for a referendum takes precedence over a town meeting decision, according to the town charter. The Putnam Taxpayers Association, for the third time, circulated petitions for the referendum.
Town meeting voters then approved holding the referendum from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. July 25 at Murphy Park recreation building for District One, and at the Highway Department garage for District Two.
The two previous referendums were held from noon to 8 p.m. The time change came about at the request of Board of Education Chairman Michael Morrill. Mr. Viens said town meeting could vote to change the hours, based on state law.
The school budget has been reduced twice by the Board of Finance after two previous referendums rejected spending plans. The first version of $15.33 million and the second version of $14.83 million were both rejected at separate referendums held the past two months.
Mr. Morrill said the $14.675 million budget, if approved, “will equate to 10 (total staff) positions to be lost at this point.”
He said the school board earlier this week discussed ways to offset the $159,000 cut from the $14.83 million budget rejected June 27. He said no votes were taken, but that, in addition to three more staff cuts, the board discussed a pay-to-play sports proposal of charging $25 per student per sport.
The board cut seven staff positions after the $15.33 million spending plan was rejected at the May 23 referendum.
Mr. Morrill said he had “no answers” about how to get the budget passed. “This has got to be viewed as a town budget for the children.”
He continued, “We are woefully behind (in spending for education). It is incorrect when the Putnam Taxpayers Association says Putnam spends $5 million more than the state allows. In fact, we spend 51.78 percent less than the state’s recommendation for Minimum Expenditure Requirement.”
Resident Sean O’Brien said he had voted against the budget at the last referendum “because I thought it (the school budget) was too low.”
School board member J. Scott Pempek said, “A no vote sends a signal to the Board of Finance that the budget is too high.”
Peter Seraphin, a Putnam Taxpayers Association member, questioned several line items in the budget. For example, he wondered why the school district has 40 paraprofessionals.
Mr. Pempek said, “We have 40 paraprofessionals because of the inordinate high number of special education children in our schools. We have to place (by law) those children in regular classrooms, so paraprofessionals assist teachers to help with children with special needs.”