During the run up to the 2009 elections, both Woodstock town committees were expecting big changes in operation of the Board of Education, and with the election of Tony Walker, Sarah Harkness and Scott Sincerbeaux it appeared that those expectations would be met. However, it is clear from the budget that has been put forth by Mr. Walker and the BOE that those expectations were based on pure fantasy.
    

Even in these difficult economic times when, according to the March 8^th board of finance meeting minutes “approximately ten percent of Woodstock taxpayers are unable to pay their taxes in full and are now making monthly payments” Chairman Walker gives us the same old story, without an increase in spending we will be “seriously impacting the students of the Woodstock Public Schools” – today’s version of Lindsay Paul’s “bare bones maintenance budget”. Hey it’s only 3.72% right? Guess again.

Well, it turns out this is more of the same sleight of hand we’ve seen many times before from Mrs. Paul.  A quick look at the numbers shows that the budget that was being argued for, and was presented to the BOF on March 8^th, actually has a 5% increase for pre-K through 8.  You see, the BOE combines all the high school costs and keeps the difference of the ARRA funds, which are lapsing, and Education Job Funds outside of the published budget – a mere $85K.  Why?  Because it makes the numbers (the increase) look a lot smaller.  Also, “All High School Costs”, mainly Woodstock Academy, have been increasing at a much slower rate than spending at Woodstock Middle and Elementary schools, so by combining all of these into one number it makes the BOE and the Baran administration look a lot less like the spendthrifts that they are. This is the same trick that has been used for years – new chairman same routine.   With a student teacher ratio just over 12:1 (that’s students per certified teacher), already 20% lower than the state average, or that for Woodstock Academy, and among the lowest in the state , they were looking to add three more teachers – and by the way, this is Connecticut, the fifth highest cost per student state in the nation. 

What makes this all the more troubling this year is the state’s fiscal issues.  It is unlikely that the state will have a budget by the time Woodstock voters are asked to approve whatever the BOF finally agrees to and presents to us, and while the governor has said that the towns would be kept whole in terms of state aid, it is also quite likely that the state is going to fall well short of meeting its spending reduction and tax revenue increase goals.  What does this mean?  Well, whatever it is you approve for a property tax increase, or more correctly, what you think you’re approving, may very well see a substantial hike when the state finally realizes that it simply doesn’t have the funds to give to the towns.   A 10% reduction in state funding would mean ~6% increase in property taxes to cover the loss – and the governor has already tried to get approval to do just that on his own.  This is a tax increase over and above what is approved with the town’s budget because if the town doesn’t get the state funds it expects it has to make them up and you can expect a “supplemental tax bill” for the difference.

Brace yourselves my friends, the days of spend, spend, spend are coming to an end one way or the other because the money simply isn’t there.   But in the meantime taxpayers can expect to get hit over and over again.   It is time for our local town officials, especially the board of ed., to face reality before they break the backs of those who are paying property taxes.

Dave Richardson

Woodstock