School Committee Approves $27.7M Budget for Next Year

The Melrose School Committee voted on Tuesday night to approve a bottom line of $27.7 million for next year's school budget.

After a $4,000 re-allocation for substance abuse prevention passed (), the committee voted first to approve five categories—Salary; Text-Supplies-Materials; Other General Expenses; Plant; and Athletics—that the committee had previously been scheduled to vote on last week. The committee then voted to approve the bottom line of $27,683,962.

Both votes passed on a 6-0 vote, with committee member Carrie Kourkoumelis voting "present" each time.

Before the vote, committee member J.D. LaRock said that the committee had yet to touch on budget issues the principals brought to the committee, citing a list including Symphony Math programs, Lexia reading programs, library books for the Horace Mann School and more.

Christine Casatelli, chairwoman of the committee's Finance and Facilities subcommittee, responded that she had asked committee members for proposals throughout the budget process.

"Now we’re at this point where we’ve gone back and forth on a few proposals and now I’m hearing new proposals," Casatelli said.

"No, I’m not making any proposals—just trying to make sense of the process," LaRock said. "As I did last year, I continue to struggle with elements of this process. We listened to principals articulate their needs, but then really didn’t do anything with that."

"And each member was free to make the proposals," Casatelli responded.

Committe member Kristin Thorp noted that suggestions were addressed last week when Superintendent Joe Case came to the committee with a proposal to reallocate funds for textbooks and more staff at Melrose High School, which the committee unanimously approved.

With regard to other needs articulated throughout the budget process, Thorp said, "I'd listened to these, and thinking about them, I decided I couldn’t make a motion on these items. I’m satisfied that this is as much we can do at this moment."

Kourkoumelis said that she has asked for further info regarding the cost of various articulated needs and said "most questions have not been answered in a way I feel is truly responsive to what taxpayers are owed." She added that it wasn't a reflection on Greg Zammuto, school business manager, who "makes a tremendous effort" to answer questions.

"This is about a process where we  have not taken this dollar figure and that dollar figure and compared—I don’t hear that discussion happening in this room," she said. "I know there are certain things I asked for explicitly and never received about actual dollar figures. I can’t give my support, not that I wouldn’t support it. I don’t feel I even know enough to support it. I feel that so much of this information has not come out in this process."

Committee Chairwoman Margaret Driscoll said she had a number of questions that "if they were not specifically answered here, I would call Mr. Zammuto, ask the questions I had and received answers I considered satisfactory. I'm prepared to support this motion."

Dolan said other items should be considered part of the budget, such as the new athletic fields, SEEM Collaborative tentatively moving into the Beebe School, the City Yard project that includes space for the school maintenance department; and the new Substance Abuse Prevention Coordinator. He added that "we talk about the process and that's OK," but it's up to the committee members to be a "show horse or a work horse."

"These are the choices that Gerry Mroz (a regular attendee and speaker at School Committee meetings) talks about all the time," Dolan said. "It’s moving around based on the priority. Now is the time within the budget, in the School Committee, Board of Aldermen or any city commission. If you want something, you need to go get it. This is the time to which to do it. That’s the difference between being around this horseshoe and in the audience."

LaRock stated that he supports the budget, which is "a positive budget given the state of our economy." He also noted the difference between the Melrose Schools budget and, as an example, Stoneham Schools budget document "which is three pages long.

"Let me just say thank goodness I'm not on the Stoneham School Committee," he said with a chuckle. On the other hand, he pointed to school budget processes in Reading and Wakefield that had additional levels of detail, context and explanation.

"We took a small first step towards that with the narrative (included in this year's budget document," LaRock said. "I would like to see much more. My perspective is that it ought to be, in it's best form, a true refelction of the district’s priorities and future path. I support this but also want to call out the committee to refine process and draw connections."

"I certainly agree with Mr. LaRock," Casatelli said. "It's not my budget, it’s not the superintendent or Mr. Zammuto's—it’s our budget. Members who want to make proposals, put things forward, you have the opportunity and the opportunity during this process. I would encourage to continue to think about these topics and let’s continue the discussion."