By Ward Peck

Editor

    Residents of Cape Elizabeth will have an opportunity
to speak on the roughly $29 million combined municipal and school
budget May 7, when the town council convenes a public hearing at 7:30
in City Hall. The details of what that budget contains, especially on
the school side, were unknown as of press time.

    The town’s finance committee, made up of the entire
seven-member town council, has been reviewing the budget proposals over
the past month. The committee met two times to review the $8.5 million
municipal budget and two times to review the school board’s $18.9
million school budget.

    Earlier in the year, the finance committee set a 2.5
percent spending increase target for the municipal budget, which was
based on both the rate of inflation as measured by the Consumer Price
Index (CPI) and the state’s “LD 1” formula meant to slow the growth of
local property tax. The committee failed to achieve consensus on a
similar target for the school budget, although several councilors
expressed a commitment to hold the school budget to the same standard.

    On Monday night and again on Wednesday, the School
board, along with Supt. Alan Hawkins presented to the Finance Committee
an $18.9 million budget representing a 3.8 percent or $693,283 increase
over the previous year. Such a budget would increase the town property
tax rate 32 cents to $16.60 per $1,000 in assessed value

    Of the seven councilors at Tuesday’s meeting, six
said they would look to cut the school budget further, with the
remaining councilor, Sara Lennon, expressing disappointment that the
board had already cut the superintendent’s original $19.2 million
request.

    “I feel embarrassed,” Lennon said. “We approve a new
cop cruiser every other year with little decision. I feel we are less
stringent on the town.”

    The three longest-serving councilors, Anne
Swift-Kayatta, Mary Ann Lynch and David Backer, who each pledged
several years ago to limit spending to the rate of inflation for three
years, reaffirmed that commitment, saying they would not vote for a
school budget that increased spending more than 2.5 percent– $237,175
less than the school board-approved budget.

“We are sitting here less than six months out from last November, when
we were frightened about TABOR and I have not heard anything about it
tonight.” Backer said. “As elected officials we are responsible. We all
point our fingers at other people saying, ‘it’s not us.’ It is us.”

    Asked how a 2.5 percent-increase budget would be
achieved, Hawkins said it would force him to cut staff and programming
at one or more schools.

    Swift-Kayatta suggested the school board explore
financing some of the budgeted projects through borrowing. The school
board has already requested a number of items totaling $169,000 be
purchased with the proceeds of a bond. Swift-Kayatta mentioned a number
of other possible expenses that could qualify as appropriate for
bonding, including the replacement of classroom furniture.

    On Tuesday, prior to a school board finance
committee meeting, Hawkins said the administration had identified a
total of $410,000 of items that could be bonded, however that number
only included $92,000 in items contained in next year’s school budget.
Based upon the Sentry’s calculations, a $91,000 decrease in the budget
request would translate to an increase of roughly 3.3 percent.

    A number of councilors focused on staffing levels.
Several of Backer’s questions to the board suggest he believes cutting
the staff may be appropriate. Backer noted that staffing levels
increased as enrollment increased in past years but have not shown the
same pattern as enrollment has dropped more recently. He noted the
school year 2005-2006 enrollment was 91 students higher than what is
projected for next school year but the number of teachers is expected
to drop by less than the equivalent to a single full-time teacher.

    “Over five years, the budget has increased 27
percent...in real dollars [taking inflation into account] an 11 percent
increase as enrollment has declined six percent.” Swift-Kayatta said.

    Two councilors Jim Rowe and Paul McKenney sought to
find a compromise figure somewhere between the 3.8 percent increase
requested by the school board and the 2.5 percent increase sought by
three councilors. Rowe, who called the school board, “the most fiscally
[responsible] school board Cape Elizabeth has had,” reminded those
present that he considered the 2.5 percent goal as a target rather than
a cap.

    “I’m willing to move off 2.5 percent, but not 3.8 percent,” Rowe said. “I’d like to see 3.0 percent.”

    McKenney distributed a calculation he prepared that
showed allowing the school board to increase the budget 3.52 percent
would result in an overall tax rate increase of 2.48 percent, which
would keep the tax increase in line with inflation. A 3.52 percent
increase would force the school board to decrease its budget by roughly
$51,000– which could be accomplished through increasing the bond
proposal.

    The remaining councilor Cynthia Dill, who represents
the town in the legislature did not commit to any figure. Dill said in
light of the school district consolidation proposals being debated,
which she strongly opposes, it is important that Cape Elizabeth
demonstrate fiscal discipline in order to make its case. She also said
as a strong supporter of education, she is hesitant to force cuts in
the district that could harm the quality of education.

    The finance committee decided to hold the vote on
the school board’s budget on Wednesday, after the Sentry’s deadline.

    On Wednesday the committee was also expected to vote
on the less controversial municipal portion of the budget.

Town Manager Michael McGovern presented a municipal budget late last
month that conforms to the council direction with a 2.45 or $203,246
increase over the previous budget.

    The proposed increase would add eight cents or 2.2
percent to the mill rate for municipal services to $3.67 per $1,000 of
assessed value, based upon the town’s current valuation.

    According to McGovern, wage and benefit increases
for municipal employees account for more than 90 percent of the
increase. Other additions include a transfer of $23,000 in improvement
projects from the self-supporting Fort Williams capital improvement
fund to the general fund-supported Fort Williams maintenance account
and an initial $7,000 contribution toward the eventual replacement of
the new high school artificial turf field.

    McGovern was able to achieve this target by
proposing the town borrow roughly $2 million for several projects,
including road, traffic and sidewalk improvements, vehicle purchases,
improvements associated with the new high school artificial turf field
and renovation of the Spurwink Church building.

    On Monday night, after hearing from a school board
unanimous in it’s opposition to the request, the council signaled it
will remove a $150,000 contribution to the purchase and installation of
bleachers next to the artificial turf field contained in the bond
request.