GREENFIELD — The long-awaited approval of union contracts was overshadowed Wednesday evening by what School Committee members described as “devastating cuts” to the proposed School Department budget.
“We should have been celebrating we signed the contracts with the staff because we were so excited with the amount of money we agreed we could afford to give the staff,” said School Committee member Jean Wall, who chairs the Personnel & Collective Bargaining Subcommittee. “Everyone on the School Committee was aware of that amount and never once said to us, ‘Don’t negotiate at that level.’”
School Committee members voted Wednesday to approve contracts for fiscal years 2023 to 2025 for the district’s teachers, instructional assistants, cafeteria workers and custodial/maintenance workers. The committee also approved an FY22 settlement agreement with the teachers’ union.
“We have a 2% raise that went to last year,” Wall said of the changes. “The 3% this year is on top of that 2%. Next year, we’ll have a 3% raise on top of that.”
Susan Voss, an instructional assistant at the Academy of Early Learning and a representative for Unit C (instructional assistants), thanked the committee for approving the new contract.
“We worked really hard on it, as member Wall said. I think there were a lot of good discussions, a lot of good compromises,” Voss said. “I hope it can go through and be funded.”
Echoing Voss, Raymond Paquette, a math teacher at Greenfield High School and treasurer of the Greenfield Education Association, said he appreciated the work of all those involved in contract negotiations. However, after seeing the mayor’s proposed budget, he added, “the work is not over.”
Earlier this month, Mayor Roxann Wedegartner submitted a $61.6 million budget proposal for FY24, representing a 6.5% increase over the current budget of $57.9 million. Included in that budget was a $1.5 million cut to Superintendent Christine DeBarge’s proposed budget of $21.25 million, reducing the School Department’s requested increase over the current fiscal year’s numbers from 10.35% to 3%.
At the time, Wedegartner noted her requested FY24 budget represents an overall reduction of $2.7 million compared to department requests.
“The school system doesn’t exist in a silo by itself and that budget has to balance,” Wedegartner said in a phone interview Thursday morning. Wedegartner was unable to attend the School Committee meeting on Wednesday due to a conflicting Ways & Means Committee meeting, during which the city’s operating budget was presented. “This is a tough year. Our revenues are down; their revenues are down because their enrollments are down.”
Enrollment between FY23 and FY24 declined by 57 students, according to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.
“I had hoped for a larger percentage, and not to have to go to just the 3% increase,” Wedegartner said. “At the end of the day, in order to make the budget balance, they’re over one-third of the budget.”
In a presentation to the School Committee, DeBarge shared the potential impacts of the $1.5 million cut, which could include the loss of several teaching positions across the district, the withdrawal of previous requests for new staff for first grade and the loss of middle school athletics, as well as a reduction to instructional supplies, special education transportation, and special education testing kits and supplies.
DeBarge added that the budget she proposed to the mayor already included $1 million in Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funds the district had not planned to use. Imposing a heavy reliance on grant-funded staff positions, she explained, will push the district closer to a “funding cliff,” making for a challenging FY25 when ESSER funds expire.
“I would invite anyone to look at these potential cuts and explain how they don’t make Greenfield very unattractive if we are slashing athletics and arts and electives,” said School Committee Vice Chair Kate Martini. “It’s an extremely penny-wise and pound-foolish way to think about a school budget.”
Chair Amy Proietti said she was “disappointed” in how the superintendent’s proposed budget, which outlined “what we need to run our schools,” changed under the mayor’s proposal. School Committee member Glenn Johnson-Mussad added that the superintendent’s proposed budget already included cuts and reductions across the district.
“This was cutting down from what we really needed to have,” he said. “Now, what the mayor’s done is absolutely devastating.”
Johnson-Mussad acknowledged that mayors have tough choices to make, “but you want to have faith that someone is operating in good faith and fighting as hard as they can for the students in Greenfield.”
Sharing a similar sentiment to her colleagues, committee member Susan Eckstrom said Wedegartner’s cuts follow a pattern among mayors in Greenfield.
“We’re now being told to find money in the department for contracts,” said Eckstrom. “In our attempts to sustain our schools, our budget is cut yearly by a single person. Not only does this discourage long-term planning, but in many cases requires a shrinking of the schools.”
Wedegartner said while a balanced budget must be voted on in May, “we still have several months of revenue generation.” She also noted that several other area districts are in similar positions with respect to funding their school budgets.
“The fight is not with me; the fight is with our state Legislature to make sure our schools … get the funding we deserve,” Wedegartner said. “I think us continuing to lobby serves us all better, not picking an enemy.”
Reporter Mary Byrne can be reached at mbyrne@recorder.com or 413-930-4429. Twitter: @MaryEByrne.