By Scott Mackey
I was one of the minority of voters who voted for the Harwood Union Unified School District (HUUSD) budget last month because I supported the school realignment proposals put forward by the board. However, that budget proposal was rejected and now we must chart a new path forward.
In hindsight, the defeat of the budget may have been a blessing in disguise as the world has changed dramatically almost overnight. With respected economists like Art Woolf suggesting that 30,000 Vermonters may be unemployed by the end of the month, the state and national economies in free fall, and legislative economists forecasting a $40 million deficit in the education fund and a $200 million shortfall in the state budget by June 30, it is clear that the 2 percent increase in the defeated budget is no longer a fiscally responsible alternative. The 4 percent increase currently being pushed as an alternative by the no voters – forget about it.
To recognize the gravity of the current situation and improve the likelihood that voters will approve the budget on the next vote, I believe that the board should propose to the voters a flat budget – in other words, a zero percent increase. Unfortunately, this will require some cuts in the current programs and services offered by our district. However, it would be much better than the truly catastrophic outcome of a 13 percent budget reduction that would be necessary if voters do not approve a budget by June 30.
Since the voters have rejected the board’s realignment proposals, these cuts will need to be distributed across all the schools in our district. In the interest of equity, I suggest that the largest cuts be required by the schools with the highest per pupil spending. Also, the bond proposal for improvements to Harwood Union High School and other district schools will need to be postponed as it will not pass in the current economic environment.
NOT UNPRECEDENTED
This will be very difficult, but it is not unprecedented. In the fall of 2008, the Great Recession was taking hold across Vermont and the nation. I chaired the Harwood board at the time, and the board recognized that we were going to need to tighten our belts to gain voter approval for the budget. We sent the voters a budget with a zero percent increase in March 2009 and followed up the next year with a budget that actually reduced spending by about 1 percent. Both budgets passed.
In addition, we negotiated a contract with the Harwood Education Association that included a one-year freeze in teacher salaries. At the time, state employees had agreed to take a 3 percent pay cut and it was our belief that with so many state employees in our towns, a one-year salary freeze was a prudent and responsible course of action that reflected the economic reality for many voters.
The one-year salary freeze also allowed the district to avoid additional layoffs that were necessary to keep the budget level. I suggest that the HUUSD Board and the unions representing district employees agree to a one-year deal to freeze salaries in the next budget year, to preserve as many jobs as possible and in recognition of the financial emergency facing the state and our district.
As the board considers the budget and its impact on taxpayers who are reeling from the economic collapse, it is important to remember that the income sensitivity provisions that allow taxpayers to pay based on income are not going to help with next year’s school taxes. This is because the property tax calculations for the budget we will vote on soon will be based on 2019 income. It is also important to remember that the money to pay for “income sensitivity” comes from the pockets of all Vermont taxpayers – residents and businesses alike. One-third of all sales taxes that we all pay go to the education fund, in part to pay income sensitivity rebates.
People who have just lost their jobs may be forced to choose between paying their property taxes or paying for basic necessities. Landlords who are being asked not to evict tenants for nonpayment of rent will still have to come up with the money to pay the property taxes on their rental properties. Local businesses trying to keep our neighbors employed will need to come up with a way to pay their property taxes at a time when their revenues are way down. Increasing school taxes at a time like this would not be prudent.
Local taxpayers cannot afford to fund business as usual right now. Sending voters a flat budget with a one-year salary freeze for school district employees will not solve these problems, but it will send a message to voters that the board gets that the world has changed.
Finally, the board would be respecting the wishes of the voters who rejected the budget by keeping all schools in the district operating the way they are now. The consequences of this decision will be apparent for each town to see as local schools are forced to make significant cuts necessary because the savings from the realignment will not occur.
Scott Mackey lives in Waterbury.
