By ETHAN HARTLEY A special meeting that would potentially allocate about $4 million to the Warwick School Department to fund sports and other crucial programs and was originally slated to occur at the City Hall Council Chambers on Saturday has been moved
This item is available in full to subscribers.
We have recently launched a new and improved website. To continue reading, you will need to either log into your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you are a current print subscriber, you can set up a free website account by clicking here.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Please log in to continue |
|
A special meeting that would potentially allocate about $4 million to the Warwick School Department to fund sports and other crucial programs and was originally slated to occur at the City Hall Council Chambers on Saturday has been moved to tonight at 7 p.m. due to a potential concern regarding the state’s open meetings law.
Originally proposed early last week, the docket for the special meeting was not officially posted with the Secretary of State’s office until the afternoon of Thursday, July 18. State law mandates that public notice for municipal meetings must be posted within 48 hours of the meeting taking place, but specifically excludes weekend hours as counting toward that provision – meaning the meeting would only have about 24 hours of notice if it went forward as planned.
Meetings can proceed with less than 48 hours’ notice if they are deemed an emergency, but such a declaration would bring in the state Attorney General’s office to make a determination as to whether or not the subject matter truly constitutes an emergency.
On Monday, City Council President Steve Merolla said that moving the meeting to tonight was the best way to avoid any legal “gray area” or any potential violations of state law. However, he also insists the meeting is still occurring in time for sports programs to run without incident, should all things go forward as outlined in the resolution.
“It was definitely a gray area as to whether it would be considered an emergency,” he said. “The school department had talked about August 1st as a drop deadline date, but obviously they're looking to get this thing done as quickly as they can…We’re still on a timeline that could work.”
The resolution itself to be discussed includes two distinct provisions that pertain to two separate fiscal years for the school department – one that is ongoing that began July 1 and one for the year that ended on June 30, to the tune of an approximately $4.4 million deficit which has yet to be resolved.
The schools have reported as of their most recent meeting on July 16 that they face an approximately $4.4 million deficit for the fiscal year that ended on June 30.
This shortfall stems from a nearly $2.9 million overrun of their operating budget – a year in which they were given an additional $1.5 million from the city in light of an $8 million ask – coupled with the lingering issue of a $1.75 million principal and interest payment on a 2006 school bond that neither the schools nor the city included in their budgets for FY19. Although the city agreed during budget hearings this past spring to take over the bond payments going forward, the schools anticipate they will be on the hook for the prior year payment. The balance is lessened by $300,000 in housing aid revenue.
This budgetary issue previously resulted in months of mediation that culminated with a controversial decision that sought to solve the problem by removing $4 million from the schools’ privately run pension fund – which actuarial reports revealed to be funded above the annual recommended contribution (ARC) to the tune of about $4 million since 2014.
The school department and school committee have concurred they will not be utilizing this method to address the deficit, citing a legal opinion from a tax attorney who concluded such a measure would violate federal law and result in serious financial penalties, including the possibility of the pension fund losing its tax exempt status that would, in effect, render the fund inoperable.
The resolution puts forth a new solution, although it is unclear at this time whether the Warwick School Committee will find that solution palatable. It calls for the school department to pay back the $4 million in $1 million installments over four years, with no interest.
Reached last week, Auditor General Dennis Hoyle said that municipalities ultimately have the power to decide how to handle deficits that occur, but that his office serves in an advisory and oversight capacity to ensure those repayment plans are realistic and attainable.
“Hypothetically, one way of eliminating the deficit in the schools is for basically the schools to generate a surplus in each of the next four or five fiscal years to reduce the deficit,” Hoyle explained.
However, there is fair reason to question the realism of this proposal, considering the schools narrowly avoided running a deficit for FY18, just posted a $4.4 million deficit for FY19, had to make $7.7 million in cuts to balance their FY20 budget and still have another round of raises for teachers looming next year that will cost in the neighborhood of $3 million in additional contractual salary obligations.
“I would share that skepticism,” offered Hoyle, when asked about the likelihood of the school department being able to run surpluses for multiple years to come.
Another option, Hoyle said, is for the city to “eat” the deficit in a one-time payment. This sort of payment would not need to be maintained through the maintenance of effort from year to year, however, which could result in the school department being right back in the same place if they do not achieve significant savings elsewhere or receive a huge windfall in funding from the city and/or state – neither of which seem all too likely given the city and state’s financial troubles of their own.
No matter what, since the school department has officially closed their books with a deficit, a plan must be achieved to solve that deficit under state law. It will remain to be seen whether this repayment proposal as outlined in the resolution will be agreed upon by the schools.
It is interesting to note that no talk of repaying the FY19 deficit was included during discussions that led to the resolution being docketed for the special meeting. School Committee Chairwoman Karen Bachus did not return a phone call seeking comment on the matter, and Superintendent Philip Thornton deferred comments to Bachus on the issue.
The second provision of the resolution would allocate $3,985,474 to the school department to restore the first 17 priority items identified on a list of budget cuts made in June to balance the school department’s approximately $7.7 million budget shortfall.
Items cut include the school sports program, teaching assistants for first and second grade classrooms, cuts to custodial hours and maintenance staff positions, school counselors, textbooks, stipends to pay faculty for after-school activities and funding for the schools’ new math curriculum.
Following a lengthy city council meeting last Monday, Ward 8 Councilman Anthony Sinapi put forth an amendment to Merolla’s original resolution – which sought to give $1.3 million to solely fund the sports programs – in the hopes to provide funding for the top 17 items cut, including all items through sports and after-school activities to the tune of about $4 million. Sinapi’s amendment was adjusted to satisfy some legal concerns but was ultimately approved unanimously by the council.
The resolution that will be discussed tonight also specifically outlines criteria for the school department to follow in order to receive that funding. The schools must submit to conducting a detailed review of their financial situation which compares their budget to alike districts, such as Cranston, as well as put forward a plan to reduce its expenditures in the future. The resolution stipulates that the city council and mayor’s office must have access to the preparation of these reviews and receive reports prior to budget hearings next year.
Lastly, the resolution specifically outlines line items from within the city budget where the $4 million will come from.
“I think the public has a right to know what this council is thinking and what the mayor is thinking about that,” Merolla said in regards to identifying areas where funding will be reallocated.
The resolution states that $1,000,000 would come from the contingency line item, which would cover prospective cost increases associated with new collective bargaining agreements (namely, the fire department, which has yet to reach an agreement with the city for the current fiscal year); $1,000,000 from the City’s Fund Balance (free cash reserves); $1,085,474 from the city’s $4 million budget for road paving; $600,000 from the legal department; and $300,000 from the fire department overtime line item.
“There are funds in different areas that may be available…that were planned for different projects that obviously didn't come to fruition,” Merolla told WPRO’s Matt Allen last week, specifically mentioning the bump to the legal department budget which reflected that, at the time, the city was preparing for a lawsuit with the school department. “Obviously there's a question of whether we should dip into our surplus account or not. There are a number of issues that will be debated on the floor.”
The line items were called into question by Mayor Joseph Solomon on Friday.
“I am committed to providing the funds to the School Department in a way that does not create a structural deficit for the City,” Solomon writes in the letter. “In order to do that, it is important that we draw the funds from accounts that the City can control through its actions.”
Solomon contends that utilizing funds from the fire department’s overtime budget would be “fiscally irresponsible” as it is out of control of the administration in terms of how much overtime is needed. In the same vein, Solomon argued that drawing down from the city’s reserves is also irresponsible.
“If we are to increase funding, we must find realistic cuts in the City budget to pay for it,” he writes. “It is not prudent to pay for the school funding through deficit spending as proposed in the Council resolution.”
Solomon ultimately put forth his own recommended list of line item adjustments, which are as follows:
The largest change comes from the reduction of funding for the road paving budget, from a little over $1 million to a $3 million reduction – which would leave $1 million budgeted for road resurfacing.
Merolla had concerns with Solomon’s proposals as well.
“My biggest concern was cutting the paving program because I think that's desperately needed and constituents seem to always be at the wrong end of the stick when we cut programs that affect their quality of life,” he said. “I didn't agree with cutting the lease purchase of vehicles…because we've seen the trash and recycling trucks being broken down and being out of service and delaying service to constituents. Those were my concerns with the list.”
The council will discuss the resolution tonight at 7 p.m. at City Hall.
18 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
Justanidiot
4 million dollars, 6 million dollars, 3% raise, 30 % raise, 24 hours, 48 hours. jest ask any warwick students, math is hards. does numbers mix everyones up
Tuesday, July 23, 2019 Report this
Thecaptain
So once again a resident has to inform the dummies on the city council that they are in violation of the OMA. Why are we now paying two city council attorneys when it is pretty clear that neither of them know what the hell they are doing.
Tuesday, July 23, 2019 Report this
wwkvoter
if that's the case, then who elected so many losers anyway?
Tuesday, July 23, 2019 Report this
wwkvoter
"I am pleased that my administration along with the City Council and School Committee were able to collaborate on a resolution that will ensure the fiscal stability of our City while also providing students with the sports programs that they cherish and the best academic curriculum...."
So, our city is now fiscally stable? And with "the best academic curriculum"? WOW. GREAT!
Wednesday, July 24, 2019 Report this
Flo5582
This shall be a great opportunity to see just how many times Mr. Hall Can spotlight himself and his lawn signs on social media. In addition, he can be the valiant Warwick resident, who, in his own words, spends so little time with his child because he’s so busy championing his own efforts with these wasteful signs, and attend another meeting, where he then tries to portray, again through social media, that he is the most knowledgeable on city and school issues. Mr.Hall can we put down the narcissistic efforts and let the people who know what they’re talkjng about, focus and get their work done? I fear that you’re making a mockery of yourself and family and just fueling the flames of the inadequately informed.
Wednesday, July 24, 2019 Report this
Bob_Cushman
wwkvoter - spot on.
Did any one hear a member of the administration or the council describe new strategic initiatives that will be undertaken to correct the structural problems in the school and city budget that will halt the unsustainable spending and annual tax increases?
No audit. No five year fiscal forecast.
Might as well be driving with a blind fold on!
Wednesday, July 24, 2019 Report this
Scal1024
Flo, I don't think you've made the point enough times already. What are your thoughts on Mr Hall?
Wednesday, July 24, 2019 Report this
Scal1024
Flo, I don't think you've made the point enough times already. What are your thoughts on Mr Hall?
Wednesday, July 24, 2019 Report this
Scal1024
Flo, I don't think you've made the point enough times already. What are your thoughts on Mr Hall?
Wednesday, July 24, 2019 Report this
whomewhy
Least are skuls are better that providence skuls right? How about some clam cakes and chowda!
Wednesday, July 24, 2019 Report this
whomewhy
63-290 – DPW/Highway Asphalt ($3,000,000); WTF. WHY?
Wednesday, July 24, 2019 Report this
DannyHall82
Oh Flo you have yet to provide anything intelligent to the table as to how we will fix this mess, if it wasn’t for Parents, Kids and Taxpayers putting pressure on the Council they would still be holding funds. Your awful attempt of a “low blow” bringing my family into your comment is classless Stacia but the people of Warwick wouldn’t expect anything different out of you. I expect you’ll respond with another bad attempt of a “low blow” lol. We all expect it....Your main goal is to cause conflict and fights between all sides, thankfully you’ve proven your mental status as unstable by constantly driving the white Jeep around/following people and recording. Normal people would call that “Stalking”.
I and other commentators look forward to your entertaining pointless response lol
Wednesday, July 24, 2019 Report this
DannyHall82
Stacia,
I almost forgot, Your grammar is horrible. Try typing while you aren’t having a mental break down. Also, please post your information as to me stating” I spend so little time with my child”? More Fake News from a Fake Screen Name (1 of many)
Wednesday, July 24, 2019 Report this
Flo5582
Some very hypocritical comments you’re throwing out there (I.e mental breakdown and low blows). That’s ok, I’ll let you go on thinking you’re as great, smart and well
liked, as you think you are. By the looks of it (3 losses) everyone knows the truth. Have a great night
Wednesday, July 24, 2019 Report this
DannyHall82
That’s it? I expected more, also the grammar is still off.
Good Night
Wednesday, July 24, 2019 Report this
Former User
Here's a summary of what the council voted on Tuesday night:
- $4 million for FY19 that does not have to be paid back and does not come out of the WISE pension account
- $3.9 million for FY20 that restores all 17 items on the school committee's list of threatened cuts, including sports
- $3 million taken from the paving budget for FY20
- City can be involved with school budget for FY21 (this is the only item that didn't change)
This is a significant loss for the mayor and city council, who thought (wrongly) that they had the upper hand in all of this.
It should make them realize that their way doesn't work, but I don't have much hope of that.
Thursday, July 25, 2019 Report this
Bob_Cushman
Questions based on the agreement:
Does the $4 million from 2019 fiscal year become part of the maintenance of effort?
Also does this mean that schools original fiscal 2020 budget included that $4 million? If not, wouldn't schools then have to cut $4 million more?
Is schools going to study difference between Cranston teacher contact and Warwick's?
Thursday, July 25, 2019 Report this
Cat2222
DannyHall - just don't feed the troll. No one cares or believes a word said. Just let her look like the idiot she is. If people wanted to ingest her particle brand of ignorance, they would be on her page.
You know what doesn't accomplish anything? Airing a personal vendetta on a community page.
Friday, July 26, 2019 Report this