School Board's attempt to quantify cuts falls short at forum

The School Board may have held its public forum last night to win over a group of parents and teachers concerned about some proposed staff cuts, but after an hour-long presentation by officials, the question and answer period indicated that the standing room-only crowd at the elementary school's library was not swayed.

The proposals that caused the most controversy are the plan to eliminate the family and consumer science teacher position at the middle and high school, the reduction of guidance services at the elementary services and the elimination of the assistant principal at the elementary school.

The board, assisted by the superintendent and the elementary and middle school principals, both of whom plan to retire at the end of the school year, justified its plan by presenting data showing an enrollment that is declining and is expected to continue its decline for the predictable future.

"It's a matter of, how do we manage declining enrollment," said Superintendent Paul DeMinico. Even after the cuts, the district's charts and graphs showed that student to educator ratios will remain comfortably within state guidelines, and in some cases the ratios would be more favorable than they were five years ago when the staff was at full strength.

However, the plan's critics indicated that no statistics would persuade them that fewer guidance counselor hours or assistant principals would be acceptable for their children or their students. During the section of the evening dedicated to public questioning, many members of the audience, some of whom were self-described as "emotional," had to be gently reminded that their allotted three minutes were over.

Sydney Leggett said that although elementary statistics show that behavioral referrals to the principal's office was on a steady decline over the past five years, that doesn't mean that behavioral problems in general follow the decline. She said many times a teacher will collaborate with a guidance counselor or principal to address an issue. "That doesn't go into writing, so that doesn't get into the data."

Loretta Sikoski didn't understand why the board would cut the family and consumer science position when Middle School Principal Jim Kemmerer had stated at the beginning of the meeting that "kids love it." Sikoski said, "Kids love it, so let's cut it?... I'm not so sure the decisions you all are making are the best ones for our kids." She also wondered aloud why the forum was held in the first place, as the board did not attempt to make any concessions on their proposals. "It feels to me like you all have made your decisions. What I'm hearing is, it's done."

Wendy Oellers, a teacher at the school and soon-to-be grandmother of a child in Gilford, said when the discussion revolves around data and numbers "We lose sight of the living, breathing child... I don't want to lose sight of the programs because of the data.

"The kids we are seeing are more needy than ever before," she added. "They're not just numbers, they're our future... I want to give them the best."

Paul Blandford, a board member, defended the board's sensitivity and dedication to students. "We're not a bunch of ogres who don't care about the Gilford school system." He said the numbers showed that the students were as well cared for as they were several years ago.

Shelly Boucher, though, said that it wasn't so simple as the numbers portrayed. "The needs are going up," she said, and added that student needs would continue to increase as the economy's slump persisted. "That's going to create more problems for children in Gilford. The needs of the children are growing greater than the decline in enrollment... Our kids do come first."

Shannon Robinson-Beland said "We chose to move to Gilford because of the quality of the education." She said that the future of the town and community would suffer with a lesser quality of education as people chose to live elsewhere as a result.

Skip Murphy was one of the few who spoke in favor of the cuts. As a member of the budget committee — although he was speaking for himself — he said the committee has been after the school board for the past few years, asking them if their ratios were beginning to become inordinate. If the cuts hadn't been made, he said, "We would have been all over them like bees on honey, because we have been in previous years... You have to manage to your present environment and I think the board and Dr. DeMinico have done that."

Another budget committee member, Terry Stewart, while acknowledging the "passion" in the room, also defended the board's budgetary reductions. "In every section of the budget, the people who come before the committee are just as passionate as you are." He said the budget committee, like the board members, realize the need to balance the schools' budget needs with that of other municipal ventures.

The school budget proposed for next year is unusual in that it is marginally smaller than the current year's budget.

Two citizens' petitions will ask voters to restore the family and consumer science, elementary guidance and elementary assistant principal. Voters will also have a chance at the Feb. 3 Deliberative Session to amend the budget as they see fit, prior to a final town, up or down, vote on March 10. However, the School Board would still have the prerogative to expend the bottom line figure as it sees fit, whether or not the money is returned to the budget for the cut positions.