To the editor,

I’ve spent the last 10 months attending school board and “Coffee with the Superintendent” meetings in an effort to determine how I would vote on the upcoming Feb. 20 referendum. Superintendent Benson and the rest of the board have been patient and responsive in answering the questions I have, and I appreciate their transparency outlining the financial constraints imposed on our district due in large part to the state funding formula. They have given me confidence that our district is truly at a funding disadvantage, on a per-pupil basis, to our peer districts. They have clearly outlined the benefits of passing the referendum, and how the additional bond referendum funds would be spent.  However, the questions that I don’t feel have been answered are:

• What has the board done to either prevent or limit the need for extra spending?
• What alternatives have been financially vetted and explored?

I’d like to highlight a couple of specific examples. About $4 million of the $28 million bond referendum is to go to updating the bus garage. I have asked the administration if they could outline the financial impact of alternative solutions, and give the voters the ability to quantify how much they value the benefits of that expenditure. Hudson schools currently contract their transportation services, so obviously our neighbors have determined this a viable option. I have no doubt that, on an annual basis, it costs more to contract these services than to run them ourselves. However, we are now proposing to spend $4 million to update our bus garage. How many years of contract services does it take to break even on that $4 million? When discussing this alternative solution, the administrative team admitted they hadn’t done a financial analysis of the alternatives recently (at least in the last five years), but identified the less-quantifiable benefits of managing transportation services ourselves. I very much appreciate the fact that my child has been able to have the same bus driver for her entire time at school, and there are advantages to having the maintenance staff take ownership of the equipment. That said, I feel like it’s important for the administration to have done the due diligence to identify exactly what the alternatives and benefits cost before going to the public and asking for additional funding. 

The bond referendum also calls for additional funding for a multipurpose space. The presentations the administration team gave noted this would be used for the wrestling team, can be used for indoor practices of the marching band and spring sports in case of inclement weather, and could also be used for community education activities. All of these sound like nice benefits. However, I would argue that the evidence surrounding the “need” of this space is sparse. When asked about whether RFSD’s sports and extracurricular activities enrollment has been expanding to justify the need for new space, the administration’s response was (paraphrasing) “our enrollment in extracurriculars is strong.” Without data, this seems surprising given RFSD’s flat enrollment projections and national trends showing a decrease in participation in extracurricular activities. No historical or projection data was provided as evidence of this, and no information as to the utilization of our existing gym/multipurpose space was given as evidence that we needed more. 

It seems that the administration should provide more data as to why these improvements are needed now, what other options have been considered, and the risks of not moving forward. This leads me to vote “no” for this year’s referendum questions. I am not actually opposed to any of the proposals, but I do need to be shown that we actually need it. In my youth, sitting in math class, the instructor would never give me full credit when I just wrote down the answer at the bottom of the page...even when it was correct. What I am asking our administration is the same thing I was told in that class: “show your work.” Please show me (and the rest of the voting public) that you’ve done what you can to work within the existing budget, and what the alternatives are, before asking for additional funding. Next year, after that work is done, then the public will have something to vote on. We would then actually have a choice between spending additional funding, or a clearly defined operational alternative. 

Tom Strey

Town of Clifton