2007-10-30-AC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

October 30, 2007 In response to a question about the legal framework in regard to separating out certain expenses, Tom mentioned MGL Chapter 37M. This statute apparently permits some limited exceptions to the general requirement that School Committees have fiscal autonomy in managing school budgets. The Burlington School Committee controls both the regular education budget and the fixed-expenses SPED budget. However, under the current arrangement in Burlington, the School Committee cannot transfer funds from one line to the other without Town Meeting approval. If Lexington adopts a similar practice, then similar constraints would apply. Also, the School Committee would be responsible for approving and paying all bills for both budgets. Circuit breaker funds received as reimbursements for out-of- district tuitions would be applied to a SPED shared-expense budget line. The Lexington School Committee favors adopting this budgeting practice to increase transparency and limit the impact of out-of-district cost increases on the regular education budget. Tom Diaz stated that the Lexington School Administration is also enthusiastic. It was pointed out that discussion of the Town’s reserves policies is needed in regard to SPED expenses and the proposed SPED budget line. It was also noted that we would need to discuss how the annual allocation of “new” revenue would work if the proposed budgeting practice is adopted. A question was raised whether the proposed budgeting arrangement might reduce the School’s motivation to bring out-of-district placements into the district. It was pointed out that, although the recent expansion of autism-related in-house programs was even more successful in reducing out-of-district costs than anticipated, opportunities for additional in-district SPED programs will be limited since the economics of programs that would service small numbers of students will not be favorable. The possible desirability of a continuing balance account arrangement for a SPED shared expense budget was noted. There was discussion of whether non-school Town officials would want to get involved in SPED placement decisions, but it was noted that privacy considerations would undoubtedly limit such involvement. Deborah Brown will follow up on this issue for the A.C. Minutes. The Committee unanimously approved minutes of the meetings of October 3, 4, 10, and 17, 2007 with minor edits from JB and AML John will take care of the edits and of sending the completed minutes to the Committee, Town Clerk, and the TMMA webmaster. - 2 -