$79 million proposed budget
Tax-rate increase predicted at 4.2 percent



GUILDERLAND — After months of debate and public discussion, the school board unanimously adopted a $79 million budget proposal Tuesday night.

The revised plan, if passed by voters on May 16, would mean an estimated tax-rate for Guilderland residents of $19.12 per $1,000 of assessed value — 77 cents more than this year.

While the proposal represents a 4.41-percent increase in spending over this year, the tax-rate hike is 4.18 percent.
"The budget presented is under the contingency cap," said Superintendent Gregory Aidala, as he explained the plan to the board. He was referring to a state-set cap applied to school districts where budget proposals have been defeated twice at the polls.
"If the budget is defeated, we actually spend more money"" asked board member Richard Weisz.
"I say that as a point of fact," responded Aidala, stating he did not want to hold it over voters’ heads.
"I think it’s only fair to let voters know that the consequence of a ‘no’ vote," said Weisz, is the cost could be higher.

While this is technically correct, said Chuck Szuberla, a spokesman for the State Department of Education, that is not the intent of the cap.
"In the old days," he said, when budgets were voted down and districts moved to contingency plans, voters had to approve spending on such items as field trips or interscholastic sports, Szuberla said; now those items are all included, he said, in the capped budget. "Almost everything is a contingent expense now," he said.

Asked if a district faces restrictions on its spending, other than the dollar amount, if it adopts a contingency plan, Szuberla said that equipment purchases are limited.

This year, the state-set cap limits the budget increase to less than 4 percent of the previous year’s spending, he said. However, items like debt service, tax certiori, and enrollment, over which a district has no control, can affect the formula, Szuberla said.
The capped budget was meant to give voters relief after they had defeated a spending plan. But, in the case of a district with a proposed budget that is lower than the contingency budget cap, Szuberla said, "If the budget is voted down, the board can adopt a contingent budget, but it would be bad PR to adopt a higher budget; it would be like spiting the voters."

Positions restored and revenues added

The final version of the Guilderland budget proposal — at $78,974,545 — is about $74,000 less than the superintendent’s original proposal. It restores several of the most contested positions and relies on additional revenues from the state, from assessment growth, and from reductions in health-insurance costs.

The superintendent’s first proposal had cut a social worker, taking some hours from Altamont Elementary School, which is smaller than the district’s four other elementary schools, and some from the middle school.

The final proposal, for an added cost of $80,000, restores the post so Altamont Elementary will have a full-time social worker and Farnsworth Middle School will be the same as this year. Many parents and staff members had spoken in favor of restoring the post.

The final budget proposal also reinstates separate English and social-studies supervisors at the high school. Members of both departments had spoken in favor of this. The cost for the restoration is $85,000.

The revised proposal also adds more high-school foreign-language instruction for $8,900 and athletic trainer services for $26,500.

The final plan keeps in place the cut of 25 teaching assistants as originally proposed. But it adds three six-hour unassigned teaching assistants, at a total cost of $46,080, to be used only if the need arises, said Aidala.
"Even though we are restoring some of the positions," said Aidala, referring to the social worker and high-school supervisor posts, "I don’t want to mislead the public they are forever...We have listened to public comment and to feedback from the Citizens’ Budget Advisory Committee."

The committee reviewed the original plan during a half-dozen televised meetings, with 20 members stating their views in the final session.

On the savings side, the new plan calls for cutting both assistant principals at the elementary schools next year, for a gain of $100,000. The original plan was to cut one next year, and the second the year after.

Also on the savings side, the district expects to spend $220,000 less than originally planned on health-insurance premiums.

The district is now expecting $600,000 more in state aid, Aidala said. Although the state legislature has adopted New York’s budget the governor has veto power until midnight on April 12, Aidala pointed out.

Also, Aidala said, the district re-examined increased town assessments of properties within the school district. In Guilderland, the increase in assessments has jumped $5 million from an expected $10 million to $15 million now.
About the state-aid estimates, Aidala said, "I don’t think we’re being reckless. We’re trying to take a conservative approach."
Board member Colleen O’Connell said she would like to ask members of the citizens’ budget committee who were "on the fence" or against the original proposal to reconsider in light of the final proposal.
O’Connell urged them, if they now supported the spending plan, to "come out and say so in public."
"I like the budget," said board member John Dornbush, just before the board’s unanimous vote. He said the final proposal maintained programs while decreasing the tax-rate hike, keeping it under the 5 percent requested by the board. "I think it’s something we can all get behind and the community can support," said Dornbush.

Health insurance

The school board has focused on health-insurance this year as annual costs for coverage have doubled in the last five years to $8.2 million.

The superintendent’s original budget proposal included $300,000 of savings in health-insurance and the final plan includes an additional $220,000 in savings over what was originally projected.

At the urging of Peter Golden, a board member, new this school year, who initiated discussion on health-insurance costs, the board Tuesday reviewed a health-insurance report before adopting the budget.

The report, presented by Assistant Superintendent for Business Neil Sanders, was prepared by the District Health Insurance Committee, made up of representatives of the district’s 11 bargaining units, along with Sanders and Susan Tangorre, director of human resources.

The district offers four different health-insurance plans with four different providers; employees pay 20 percent of the cost and the district pays 80 percent.

The committee recommended continuing the two Blue Shield plans and the Express Scripts self-insured prescription drug coverage with no change in benefits; the rate-renewal increase ranged from 6.5 percent to 7.9 percent.

The committee also recommended continuation of the Mohawk Valley Plan health-maintenance organization with mandated changes imposed by the carrier; the rate-renewal increase is 9.1 percent.
Sanders called the committee’s final three recommendations "win-win opportunities."

First, the committee recommended a change in plan design for the Capital District Physicians Health Plan, moving from the AvidCare 20 plan with a $20 office-visit co-pay, to the AvidCare 25 plan, with a $25 office-visit co-pay. The rate renewal would decrease 5.3 percent.
"Overall, the district will save in excess of $350,000 while employees will save almost $100,000 based on our 80/20 cost-sharing ratio," Sanders said.

He also said that employee savings will more than compensate for the additional $5 co-pay.

Second, the committee recommended offering CanaRx, a new prescription drug plan option for active employees and retirees at no cost to the district.
"The drugs available from Canada are much cheaper," said Sanders. "Participants in this plan would order a three-month supply of brand-name drugs for a zero co-pay....Overall the savings for the employee is the elimination of a co-pay while the savings for the district is the lower drug costs."

Third, the committee recommended pursuing a health-insurance buyout for employees who chose not to take the district’s health-insurance plan. Some, for example, are covered through their spouse’s insurance plans.
"Up to this point, we have offered all eligible employees access," said Sanders. "We recognize to pay people a minimal amount, we would save on the premium."
The deadline for making a decision on whether to offer the buyout is May 5, Sanders said. "We’ve started the process of meeting with the associations. You need to have a certain number of participants to make the program viable," he said.

Golden asked about the anxiety level of workers over health-insurance coverage and Sanders said he thought it had lessened. Golden said he was particularly concerned about retirees, and asked if they felt safe.
Tangorre said, "Part of that safety net comes from communication." Workers will be informed of the new options, she said.

The board debated at length whether it should accept the committee’s report in a separate vote or endorse the recommendations, as it has in the past, by simply adopting the budget. In a split vote, 5 to 4, the board decided to simply adopt the budget.
"We’re arguing about semantics," said President Gene Danese, just before the split vote, "when all we have to say is the health-insurance committee did a really great job...I really don’t want to argue anymore."