A discussion between the city’s tax board and school district administrators did not happen Tuesday because tax board members didn’t have any questions about the school budget.
Last month, schools Superintendent Stephen Tracy met with the Derby Board of Apportionment and Taxation to detail why the district is asking the city for a $1.28 million increase in funding to run the schools next year.
The meeting, which featured a standing-room only crowd of school supporters, was supposed to be the first of two possible meetings between the tax board and school leaders.
Members of the tax board were supposed to e-mail school budget questions to tax board chairwoman Judy Szewczyk, who would get e-mail answers from the school district before the second discussion.
However, Szewczyk said Tuesday no one on the tax board sent her questions about the school budget, so a second discussion wasn’t scheduled.
The tax board was scheduled to meet Tuesday to discuss other aspects of the city’s budget proposal.
City Treasurer Keith McLiverty was scheduled to go over revenue estimates during the tax board workshop. That information could be crucial in deciding how the entire Derby budget — city and school items — will play out, Szewczyk said.
A public hearing on the Derby budget — where any member of the public can tell the tax board what he or she thinks — is scheduled for Tuesday, May 10 at 7 p.m. in the Aldermanic Chambers on Derby City Hall’s second floor.
Public hearings in Derby are not usually question and answer sessions. The public is simply given the opportunity to make statements.
So What’s The Tax Board Thinking?
At last month’s meeting, members of the tax board asked a few questions, but didn’t really indicate how they felt about the school budget either way.
However, the school board’s request of $1.28 million is not looking good, based on statements Szewczyk made Tuesday to the Valley Indy.
She said her statements are based on her own opinions and are not based on conversations with the other nine members of the tax board.
Szewczyk said the school district will probably get an increase of some kind to cover contractual obligations, but not the 7 percent increase school officials have requested.
Szewczyk said the city simply can’t afford to fully fund the Derby school board’s request — especially given the state of the economy coupled with a budget proposal from Gov. Dan Malloy that could raise taxes.
Szewczyk took issue with the school board’s assertion that the city under-funds the school district.
She said a Valley Independent Sentinel chart being used by the school district to show how much Derby spends on its schools doesn’t include an additional $1.1 million the city spends on the school district for items such as workers’ compensation insurance and snow plowing.
That point has also been made in recent months by Phil Robertson, Mayor Anthony Staffieri’s administrative assistant and Henry Domurad, Derby’s finance director.
The city is now trying to transfer some of that $1.1 million to the school district. Click here to read a previous story.
Szewczyk said the school-funding issue goes beyond what’s happening in Derby.
“This is the whole problem with the education system — they haven’t realized they have to change,” Szewczyk said. “It’s not the same as it was 50 years ago. It doesn’t work the same. They have to keep up with the times or they are going to fail.”
Szewczyk said it is still a little early to say how much more money the city can allocate for the school district.
The following is a list of Derby tax board meetings for the remainder of the budget season. Each and every meeting is open to the public, as dictated by state law.
However, public comment is only offered May 10 and May 16.
Derby Tax Board Budget Schedule:
Media Center Tuesday, April 26 at 7 p.m. Deliberations and/or followup (as needed)
Media Center Tuesday, May 3 at 7 p.m. Deliberations & Preliminary Budget Adoption
Aldermanic Chambers Monday, May 16 at 7 p.m. Monthly BoAT Meeting
Aldermanic Chambers Tuesday, May 17 at 7 p.m. Public Hearing
Derby Public Schools is in DRG H. DRG stands for District Reference Group and school districts are categorized in their respective DRG by their affluence and need. I’m fairly certain Dr. Tracy explained in his presentation to the Tax Board exactly what a DRG is. The most-affluent, low-need districts are in DRG A, while the least-affluent, high-need districts are in DRG I. Derby happens to fall in DRG H, one category below the neediest cities in the State of Connecticut.
Of the 9 school districts in the same DRG as Derby, 7 of them spend more per student than Derby. (DRG H: Ansonia, Tannery, Derby, East Hartford, Meriden, Norwalk, Norwich, Stamford and West Haven)
Even more interesting, yet more disturbing, the school districts in DRG I (Bridgeport, Hartford, New Britain, New Haven, New London, Waterbury and Windham), the least-affluent, highest-need districts in the state, still spend more per student than Derby does. These least-affluent, highest-need school districts include Connecticut’s 7 largest and poorest cities.
———————————————–
Derby’s SAT scores are consistently worse than the state average, and have gotten progressively worse since 2007.
2007: 108 worse than state average
2008: 214 worse than state average
2009: 205 worse than state average
2010: 200 worse than state average
It’s not a coincidence that Derby’s SAT scores have deteriorated so much since 2007 because that’s around this same time Derby began slashing the Board of Education budget on a consistent basis in order to keep taxes down and garner votes.
———————————————–
2009–2010 CAPT Scores
Reading: State average for students at or above goal: 45.9%; Derby: 26.6%
Writing: State average for students at or above goal: 60%; Derby: 52.5 %
Math: State average for students at or above goal: 48.9%; Derby: 26.6%
Science: State average for students at or above goal: 45.5%; Derby; 26.7%
There is a significant discrepancy in Derby’s CAPT scores when compared to the rest of the state of Connecticut and the discrepancy has a direct correlation to the amount of funding the Derby Board of Education receives.
I hope you reconsider your thinking Mrs. Szewczyk.
I would just like to point out to sharpeye that the size of a district should be irrelevant when considering the amount that is spent per student.
As a parent, I am terrified by those statistics.
sharpeye,
The figures I presented are averages. An average is defined as “a single value (as a mean, mode or median) that summarizes or represents the general significance of a set of unequal values.” The Connecticut State Department of Education has strategically placed Derby in DRG H due to its economic affluence to the other cities and towns in the same DRG, not its geographical size.
Therefore, I am comparing apples to apples, not apples to oranges as you are suggesting. Based on averages, the size of Derby has absolutely no impact on this issue. Additionally, based on your argument and what you are writing, you are suggesting that cities such as Waterbury, Bridgeport, Norwich, New Britain, etc. have additional monetary resources compared to Derby. Can you please show me where you obtained that information? Not only do I disagree with you, sharpeye, the State of Connecticut disagrees with you, based on firm statistical data.
Finally, if you can kindly point out in my comments where I blamed Judy Szewczyk for Derby’s continued underfunding of our education system, I would greatly appreciate it.
just a thought: On the surface, you appear to be on the right path. The board of education budget does not include any hiring. Unfortunately, even if they get the full amount they are requesting from the tax board, there will still be layoffs.
This is from a previous article on this site:
“The initial budget request — from Tracy to the school board, proposed Feb. 3 — included nine layoffs. However, the school board voted to put full-day kindergarten back into the budget, along with several athletic programs that were going to be tossed. The latest version of the budget eliminates two teaching positions at the high school, along with two more at the city’s two elementary schools.”
Derby schools have been short changed for years. Even with what seems to be such a significant request, there will still be teacher layoffs. Derby has been forced to layoff teachers for the past several years. You cannot get blood from a stone.
Mr Hyder
What you fail to mention is the states involvement. Mr Hyder did you know that of all the schools you listed Derby gets the least amount of funding from the state?
For example and I will not lie i haven’t looked at the most recent data, but Derby normally hoovers between 43-48% funding from the state. While cities with similar URIGs consistently receive well over 50% funding from the state. I also would like to point out that a few years back the state took over Ansonia and drastically increased the amount of funding that was being provided.
My other issue with you Mr. is that i think the issue in Derby goes beyond that of Funding but i question efficiency. The BOE does a horrible job at going in depth into the Supers budget. One of the line items was for Tech upgrades. WHY IS THE SUPER PUTTING HARD LINES it is super expensive and wireless is cheaper…and i could be wrong but i think it was either 43k upgrade or 430k, either way it is BS and the super is just trying to jack the budget.