Thursday’s Public Forum: A Summary

The first half of Thursday’s public forum in the auditorium consisted of a presentation by the Dresden Cost Reduction Committee, the ad hoc committee tasked with formulating ideas that could reduce the costs and increase the revenue of the Dresden School District. After Carey Callaghan, the committee chair, gave a presentation on the subject, Kari Asmus and other members entertained questions—and a few comments—from the public.

The schools face the loss of $500,000 of “leftover money from a bond issue,” transferred expenses and potential cuts in aid revenue from the State, and another thirteen years of debt service, which currently accounts for over $3,529,000 of the $22,000,000 budget.

Another substantial expenditure after regular education is special education. Since the 2000-2001 school year, its cost has increased at an average rate of 11.22% per year. This is due to “statutory requirements”: special education is mandated by the State and federal governments, and the school district does receive aid money for this purpose.

Tuition from towns other than Hanover and Norwich has continued to be a significant source of revenue, bringing in more than $1,852,000 this year. It is important to remember that the cost of tuition rises with the budget, and while students paying this price to attend Hanover High may receive some aid, some community members are concerned that reducing various HHS programs will discourage tuition students from enrolling.

During the question-and-answer session that followed the presentation, some community members took the opportunity to state their personal opinions about cost reduction. Some presented simple plans for increasing income; some accused the committee of being misleading and requested additional information, such as the district’s financial data of the past decade with inflation taken into account; and still others questioned the district’s need to reduce the budget at all.

Students’ inquiries regarding the limits that may be placed on electives were difficult to answer. The committee had “no idea” which or how many electives would be affected and stated that the term “elective” is of itself “ill-defined.” When asked how the committee had been able to estimate that limiting electives would save about $124,000 at the high school and $78,000 at the middle school, the speaker responded that the potential savings are calculated according to how many FTEs, or full-time equivalent teachers, would be eliminated, with one FTE equaling $65,000. She described the process as “very ‘back of the envelope,’ as they say.”