Initial West Hartford school budget hike = 7.7 percent

It could be worse.

Take some time to look at the school superintendent’s budget presentation and the preliminary budget summary that were given to the school board last night. I’m not convinced it’s all needed, but it’s a solid beginning for what might prove a difficult fight to get adequate funding for our schools.

I appreciate that the school administration posted the documents today, giving us all access to the broad outlines of what’s on the table in this $122.1 million proposal. I hope they follow that up by posting online the detailed budget that we also need in order to take an intelligent look at the plan.

The one thing that leaped out at me immediately was a $190,000 request for school security enhancements. What’s that all about?

Advertisements

5 Comments

Filed under Schools, Taxes, Town government

5 responses to “Initial West Hartford school budget hike = 7.7 percent

  1. Stop by and see the webpage at West Hartford Taxpayers Association

    http://whta.org/WHTAbudgetexplanation.htm

    See how this new mill rate and revaluation will affect your tax bill.

    Just a question for you? Do you think our schools in Wrest Hartford are not adequately funded?

  2. Are the schools adequately funded? I think so.
    My concern is whether in our understandable zeal to hold down taxes, we’ll wind up cutting too deeply in education.

  3. Have you figured out how much a rate of 30 or more mills will mean to your tax bill yet? Do we REALLY need stadium lights at the high school for $300,000 a piece (not including maintenance costs?) That’s $600,000 – do you know how many teachers or supplies we could buy for that? See, my objection is that the money we spend on these increases hardly ever find their way into the classroom.
    Cutting deeply into education won’t hurt a thing if the cuts are done on the administrative bloat. But the educrats will protect their jobs first and cut things that hurt the kids first. It’s pure selfishness.
    Meanwhile people are being taxed out of their homes.

  4. Peter G

    Judy, I think it’s reasonable to quesiton stadium lights — it’s a good example of what should NOT be a priority in the education budget. But you then go on to say that

    “Cutting deeply into education won’t hurt a thing if the cuts are done on the administrative bloat. But the educrats will protect their jobs first and cut things that hurt the kids first. It’s pure selfishness.”

    What does this have to do with stadium lights? It’s bait-and-switch. I’m all for finding misprioritizations as well as genuine waste, and I am open to the possibility that some of that could be in the nature of “adminstrative bloat.” But you haven’t given us an example of that. So to go from “we don’t need stadium lights” to “the educrats [nifty little piece of invented right-wing jargon if I ever heard one] are selfish jerks who don’t care about our kids or our taxes” is a leap without logic.

  5. Stadium lights are so clearly not going to make the final cut that I didn’t bother to mention them. They might be a good idea, but it would take a lot to include them in a budget like this one.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s