1. Dresden Cost Reduction Committee Interim Board Report 8/24/2010 1. Mission & Governance 2. Members 3. Work plan 4. Work-to-date 5. Cost growth primer 6. Ideas being evaluated 7. Defined potential savings 8. Undefined potential savings 9. Some preliminary conclusions 10. Work ahead of us 11. Implementing change

2. Mission & Governance 8/24/2010 Dresden Cost Reduction Committee Board Presentation 2 MISSION: The Dresden Cost Reduction task force will work to identify areas of possible savings at the Richmond Middle School and Hanover High School, and potentially at the SAU administrative level, that could be acted upon for the 2011-2012 budget and beyond. GOVERNANCE: The committee will be advisory to the Dresden School Board, and may refer relevant matters to the standing committees – notably the Budget, Negotiating Education and Athletic committees.

3. Members 8/24/2010 Dresden Cost Reduction Committee Board Presentation 3 Carey Callaghan, Chair, CIO American Trust John Aubin, Assistant Superintendent for Business Kari Asmus, Dresden Chair John Dolan, Executive Director of VINS Kristi Fenner, CPA and Treasurer of Ansys, Member of DFC Dr. Wayne Gersen, Superintendent Hilary Pridgen, Proprietor, Trumbull House B&B Rick Sayles, CFO of KVO Capital Management Gordon Spaeth, Dresden Board

4. Work Plan 8/24/2010 Dresden Cost Reduction Committee Board Presentation 4

5. Work-to-date 8/24/2010 Dresden Cost Reduction Committee Board Presentation 5  Solicit ideas from the community at large, and from all of the relevant constituencies of the schools, on areas where we can reduce expenses and potentially increase income  Brainstorm approaches that could result in savings with relevant administrators  Understand best practices and approaches that have been used successfully by area organizations  Refer ideas to relevant standing committees

6. Cost growth primer, part I 8/24/2010 Dresden Cost Reduction Committee Board Presentation 6

7. Cost Growth primer, part I 8/24/2010 Dresden Cost Reduction Committee Board Presentation 7

8. Cost growth primer, part I

9. Cost growth primer, part II 8/24/2010 Dresden Cost Reduction Committee Board Presentation 9 Revenues2000-012010-11% Growth/Year Dresden Assessment to Hanover$5,441,066$11,008,4917.30% Dresden Assessment to Norwich$4,068,294$ 5,754,6723.53% 6 th Grade Tuition$ 922,871$ 2,088,2758.51% Other tuition$1,038,359$ 1,852,3435.96% Hanover Town0$ 100,000n/a Dartmouth College00n/a Building Aid0$ 659,484n/a From Unspent Capital Project Funds0$ 500,000n/a Other$ 114,001$ 158,2003.33% TOTAL$11,584,591$22,121,4656.68%

10. Cost growth primer, part II 8/24/2010 Dresden Cost Reduction Committee Board Presentation 10 Expenditures2000-012010-11% Growth/Year Regular Ed$10,625,439$16,144,8244.27% Special Ed$ 920,136$ 2,663,99111.22% Debt Service$ 60,089$3,529,17250.28% TOTAL$11,605,664$22,337,9876.77% Enrollment2000-012010-11%Growth/Year Richmond Middle448426-.50% Hanover High768775.37% Total1,2161,201-.10% Staffing2000-012010-11%Growth/Year Certified teacher110.34115.1.42% Ed Assistants42.5755.302.65% Custodial11.9314.652.08% Admin and Other15.9416.40.29% Total180.78201.451.09%

11. Cost Growth Primer, Part III 8/24/2010 Dresden Cost Reduction Committee Board Presentation 11

12. Cost growth primer, part IV 8/24/2010 Dresden Cost Reduction Committee Board Presentation 12  For 2011-12, a zero increase in base salary and zero increase in all budget areas except benefits and special ed yields a 3.2% annual budget growth!  Assumes a 10% increase in both benefits and special ed  Assumes 1.25% increase in salary accounts as a result of step  Over five years, this would result in a 17.1% increase in the total budget, roughly $4,000,000 over current year budget  Cost shifts from State likely to increase cost and diminish revenue  Retirement costs likely to be downshifted to local government, employees  This could be a $360,000 item in 2011-2012 budget year NOT in our plans, with more increases in following years  Building aid, other State aid revenues likely to be cut  BUSINESS AS USUAL IS NOT SUSTAINABLE

13. Ideas being evaluated To date, the Dresden Cost Reduction Committee brainstormed over 35 cost savings ideas, some of which are outlined in subsequent slides, and some of which will be shared with the Dresden Negotiations Team The Dresden Cost Reduction Committee seeks more ideas from the public and staff. To share your thoughts, e-Mail us at budgetcuts@sau70.org 8/24/2010 Dresden Cost Reduction Committee Board Presentation 13

14. Defined potential savings 8/24/2010 Dresden Cost Reduction Committee Board Presentation 14 Health insurance renegotiations $ 50,000 +/- Refinance of debt service $ 25,000 +/- Limit elective offerings at HS $124,000 +/- Limit elective program at MS$ 78,000 +/- Reduce custodial work force$ 50,000 +/- Join Federal Lunch program$ 23,000 +/- Increase teaching load of HS department heads to 4$ 65,000 +/- Peak Power Management $ 8,000 +/- Increase average # of students assigned to teachers $130,000 +/- from 82.5-per-core academic teacher to 90-per-core Academic teacher at HHS to reduce 2.0 FTEs

15. Undefined potential savings 8/24/2010 Dresden Cost Reduction Committee Board Presentation 15 Explore deployment of Special Ed staff Expand on line instruction Offer AP courses and eliminate advanced electives in academics to reduce staff Institute Post-Graduate program at HHS to increase revenue Eliminate additional elective courses at RMS, HHS to reduce staff Increase class sizes at HHS, RMS to reduce staff Increase # of courses assigned to teachers to reduce staff Replace textbooks with Kindles (or on-line texts) to lower textbook costs Explore use of grant writer to increase revenue Promote the rental of facilities to increase revenue Explore Combining services with town (payroll, grounds, maintenance, custodial)

16. Some preliminary conclusions 8/24/2010 Dresden Cost Reduction Committee Board Presentation 16 Special Ed, benefits, and salary schedule structure– even without adjustments to pay schedule– are built-in cost drivers for Dresden Savings of over $500,000 could be realized if ALL defined savings were adopted by Dresden Board The cuts under consideration will require shared sacrifice among all constituents: staff, students, parents DCRC has identified several savings opportunities that could limit growth rate of total compensation in future. These will be shared with negotiating team. DCRC recommends focus on total compensation in negotiations with employee groups

17. Work ahead of us 8/24/2010 Dresden Cost Reduction Committee Board Presentation 17 Continue evaluation of existing ideas Solicit new ideas from schools, community and organizations through one or more of the methods: Community forum School meetings E-mail suggestion box Work with relevant committees on referred ideas Finalize recommendations Communicate recommendations

18. Implementing change 8/24/2010 Dresden Cost Reduction Committee Board Presentation 18 Assess ability of school community to assimilate multiple cost initiatives Realistic view of what change can be managed How to maintain or even improve excellence of education with reduced resources Short term versus long term tradeoffs Long term cost savings accruing from negotiations may impose an upfront cost. How do we measure the tradeoff? How much tolerance does the community have for tradeoffs in the current environment? Can we effectively communicate the value of such tradeoffs?