1. Shrewsbury Public Schools Fiscal Year 2013 Administrative Budget Recommendation March 14, 2012

2. Budget Recommendation Guidelines Develop a budget with the goal of offering appropriate regular and special education programs and services. Support our Strategic Priorities and District Goals Support the Core Values of respect and responsibility, collaboration and communication, commitment to high standards and expectations, and equity for all students. Support the recruitment, hiring, and retention of quality professional and other instructional and administrative staff. Meet legal mandates.

3. Budget Factors FY 12 Current Budget$47,139,676 Lost Funding$2,451,140 Operational increases$715,152 Special Education Increases$706,879 Personnel Cost Increases*$1,735,895 Required for Level Service$52,748,742 (11.9%) *Based on contractual increases and no new positions

4. Proposed Reduction Plan Personnel Cost Reductions$2,061,612 Operational Reductions$251,365 Total Proposed Reductions$2,312,977

5. Budget Recommendation Summary FY12 Budget$47,139,676 FY13 Projected Increases (+)$5,609,066 Less Cost Reduction Plan(-)$2,312,977 FY13 Recommended Budget$50,435,765 6.99% Increase from FY 12 Town Manager Increase (+) $2,451,140 Town Manager Recommendation$49,590,816 Amount Above Manager’s$844,949

6. FY13 Budget Allocation

7. FY13 Salary Overview

8. Budget History

9. Guiding Principles Strategic priorities Core value of equity Reduce through attrition to save individuals’ jobs

10. Guiding Principles Short term vs. long term impact Recent reduction history

11. Operating Cost Reductions Fewer students projected in vocational technical high school Elimination of tutoring requirement due to No Child Left Behind waiver Reductions in contracted services for special education Various miscellaneous line item adjustments Total Operating Cost Reductions = $251,365

12. Personnel Cost Reductions: Early Childhood & Elementary Schools Hiatus of – 1.0 FTE Beal principal position Offset cost of – 1.55 FTE instructional coach positions through eligible grants/tuition accounts Reduction – 3.0 FTE Grade 1 classroom teachers at Beal (overflow enrollment returns to Floral site and increases class size at Floral; shift Beal FTE to full day kindergarten tuition account)

13. Personnel Cost Reductions: Early Childhood & Elementary Schools Reduction – 1.0 FTE Grade 2 classroom teacher @ Coolidge Reduction – 1.0 FTE Grade 4 classroom teacher @ Coolidge Reduction – 1.0 FTE Grade 4 classroom teacher @ Paton

14. Personnel Cost Reductions: Early Childhood & Elementary Schools Reduction – 1.0 FTE Grade 1 classroom teacher @ Spring Street Reduction – 1.0 FTE Grade 4 classroom teacher @ Spring Street Reduction – 4.0 FTE paraprofessionals (or equivalent hours) Position offsets through grants/additional full day kindergarten results in net elementary position loss of 8.0 FTE Total Early Childhood/Elementary Personnel Cost Reductions = $810,594

15. Personnel Cost Reductions: Middle Schools Reduction – 2.0 FTE curriculum coordinators Hiatus – 0.2 FTE foreign language director (Nov. retirement) Reduction – 1.0 FTE technology teacher @ Sherwood

16. Personnel Cost Reductions: Middle Schools Reduction – 2.0 FTE Grade 6 team teachers @ Sherwood Reduction – 2.0 FTE Grade 7 team teachers @ Oak Reduction – 2.0 FTE Grade 8 team teachers @ Oak

17. Personnel Cost Reductions: Middle Schools Reduction – 1.0 FTE special education teacher @ Oak Reduction – 4.0 FTE paraprofessionals (or equivalent hours) Net position loss at middle schools = 14.2 FTE Total Middle School Personnel Cost Reductions = $659,160

18. Personnel Cost Reductions: High School Hiatus – 0.6 FTE foreign language director (Nov. retirement) Reduction – 0.4 FTE foreign language teacher Reduction – 1.0 FTE English teacher

19. Personnel Cost Reductions: High School Reduction – 1.0 FTE mathematics teacher Reduction – 0.6 FTE science teacher Reduction – 1.0 FTE social science teacher

20. Personnel Cost Reductions: High School Reduction – 1.0 FTE visual arts teacher Reduction – 4.0 paraprofessionals (or equivalent hours) Net position loss at high school = 9.6 FTE Total High School Personnel Cost Reductions = $591,858

21. Personnel Cost Reductions: Impact Net elimination of 31.80 full time equivalent positions from the educational program Additional 6.55 FTE shifted to other sources and removed from appropriated budget Total District Personnel Cost Reductions = $2,061,612

22. Personnel Cost Reductions: Impact Class sizes slightly above School Committee guidelines with average of 23 students in Floral Street Grades 1 & 2 and Spring Street Grade 1 Class sizes well above School Committee guidelines in all Grade 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8 sections – average of 29 students Class sizes will be above School Committee guidelines in many high school classes – unknown until course selection and scheduling process complete

23. Personnel Cost Reductions: Impact Reduced visual arts program offerings at the high school Fewer technology class sections at Sherwood

24. Personnel Cost Reductions: Impact Reduced administrative capacity – Shared principal position between Beal and Paton – No foreign language director for most of the year – Less support for curriculum and instruction and less capacity to supervise and evaluate staff at the middle schools

25. Cost Reductions: Impact Level funding for athletic programming may require additional revenue or program cuts to cope with rising costs Lack of funding for textbooks, instructional materials, school based budgets will continue to squeeze operations and require deferral of investments Small increase in technology funding will delay implementation of some strategic initiatives

26. Cost Reductions: Impact Small increase in technology funding will delay implementation of some strategic initiatives and keep the district behind the curve in replacing aging technology hardware, unless alternative funding can be accessed

27. Mitigation Efforts Retirement incentive program Full day kindergarten program expansion

28. Next Steps Public hearing at Oak Middle School on March 21 at 7:00pm Continue to monitor potential costs Consider additional reductions

29. Questions & Comments