In a contentious vote held Wednesday evening, the Newton School Committee (NSC) elected to approve the $296.7 million “level services plus” budget submitted by Superintendent Anna Nolin.
The motion passed in a 6–3 vote. Ward 4 NSC Member Tamika Olszewski and Ward 6 NSC Member Paul Levy joined Newton Mayor Ruthanne Fuller to vote against Nolin’s proposal.
In the minutes leading up to the vote, NSC Chair Christopher Brezski told NSC it is its principal responsibility to reach an agreement reflective of the district’s needs and priorities.
“Our obligation is to present a budget to the city council that we believe is a financial expression of the educational programs and reflecting the goals and objectives of the school committee,” said Brezski.
Approving Fuller’s smaller allocation and the more extensive budget cuts that accompany it would be a dereliction of the NSC’s duty, according to Brezski.
“If you vote for a budget for a budget that says $292 million instead of $296 million, you are saying $292 million reflects the goals and objectives,” said Brezski. “You can’t sit here and say I support Dr. Nolin’s budget and this is what I think the students need … but I will send to the city council some other number that is lesser.”
At last week’s meeting, Olszewski argued that the committee had no authority to change the budget and must abide by Fuller’s attempts to balance the city budget.
But on Wednesday, Brezski argued that the NSC must send a firm message as to what the Newton schools require.
“Let’s set all the illegality and all those red herrings aside because they are of absolutely no impact on what we’re doing right here, right now,” Brezski said. “We have stated our case as to what we think the students of this district need, and we will continue to work to find the funding for that.”
The budgetary issue is not a new development either, according to Brezski. The current predicament is the result of several years of substandard allocations.
“[Nolin’s budget] reflects the building back of what has been a deterioration over many years,” said Brezski. “This is a crisis. We are constantly in this cycle of just never having what we need.”
Brezski emphasized the urgency of voting for Nolin’s proposal. If Fuller’s allocation were approved, there would not be an opportunity to raise additional funds later.
“If we agree to $292 million, I can guarantee you will not see another cent come into this operating budget in the next year,” said Brezski. “I promise you that. So let’s not delude ourselves into thinking we can vote this lower amount, and we’ll find money somewhere down the road this year.”
Fuller challenged Brezski to send an even stronger message to the city council. Fuller suggested that the NSC put forth the ‘thrive’ budget instead, which would completely fund all school services and require no cuts.
“If you are simply advocating on behalf of teaching and learning, you don’t do level service plus,” said Fuller. “I’d urge you to change your motion and vote for ‘thrive’ if you want to go to the city council with the best budget for the students.”
Ward 3 NSC Member Anping Shen criticized Fuller for her impractical suggestion.
“With all due respect, I think we know how to vote,” said Shen. “And I guess your advice is just not appreciated here.”
Olszewski broke with the other committee members to stress the financial impracticality of Nolin’s “level services plus” budget.
“This whole strategy has been built on the premise that the mayor will come up in either the allocation or the funds dispersed from the stabilization fund or be real flexible with free cash,” said Olszewski. “We will have to align our direction with our means. I do not agree it is a wise thing for us to authorize this vote today.
According to Olszewski, voting for a nonviable budget would only protract the process.
“It won’t have any effect unless there are corollary funds to match the allocation with this budget,” said Olszewski. “I think we would be right back here at some point.
Ward 8 NSC Member Barry Greenstein reiterated that the committee must submit to the city council a budget beneficial for the schools, even if it does not have the authority to allocate resources.
“If we do not have control over how this money is funded and where we can pull the money from, the control we have is to send a message,” said Greenstein. “And the message is: We at the bare minimum need to do the level services plus. And it’s not aspirational, it’s bare minimum.”
Fuller responded to the criticisms she has attracted lately by restating that the city’s stretched finances have necessitated a more conservative approach.
“Some people have characterized my actions and financial strategy as heartless, or perhaps incorrect, or penny-wise and pound-foolish,” said Fuller. “But I promise you, we are doing what you’re supposed to do.”
