As a result of the 9-1 vote to recommend the override amount, I was curious as to why the no vote was cast. My email query went to Ruthann and this is her response:
In response to your question about why I voted no at the meeting last night, I really appreciate you following up so that nobody misunderstands my intent.
If not for the tremendous work of Superintendent Giguere and his team redistricting the entire school system, closing down schools, and consolidating resources, our district would be in absolute disarray.
The reason I voted no, is because I'm concerned about the ability to pass additional overrides in the near future. There is an agreement among the committees in town that small future overrides are going to be necessary. In fact, in the Town Administrator's fiscal forecast, the town could be looking at a deficit as early as 2027. There are some unknown variables, and we can hope this will not be the case. However, this potential creates much angst among not just parents, but the teachers in our district who have endured consistent layoffs for the last decade.
I am also concerned that if we do need to patch a gap in the town's budget through another override, it will likely be the responsibility of the School Committee and district to request and campaign for this need alone. Historically, when an override election takes place solely for our school district, it has failed. Notably, this is because parents tend to be underrepresented in local elections.
As stated at the JBSC meeting last night, we have the ability to draft a question for the election that would present more than one option to the residents to vote on. One being level service, and one being "levels service plus" which could include an additional amount that would provide increased stability to the district. Our Superintendent has five new schools to get up and running this fall. And although the basic infrastructure remains the same, each of these five schools have new principals, teaching staff, students, bus routes, schedules, and so on.
This is a massive undertaking, and parents want to ensure our educators have the support to execute this without unnecessary obstacles. Providing a "stabilization account" so to speak, for the school department and/or the town, would allow our leadership team to stay focused on the tasks at hand, and eliminate concerns around potential disruptions, or unforeseen events that could interfere with a smooth transition.
I also firmly disagree that our governing body must predict what a "passable" override should be. Instead, I feel that giving the voters a choice would be the more democratic way to propose this question to the town. This idea is not novel, and I do not agree that voters will be too confused, and that confusion could result in a failed override.
In summary, I am one-hundred percent in support of solving this structural deficit.
I will campaign my heart out, side by side with the One Franklin Committee as they educate our residents around the importance of investing and preserving our amazing community and those that serve it.
Thanks for reaching out, I'll see you on the campaign trail!
Best,
Ruthann O'Sullivan
Franklin School Committee
Member Joint Budget Sucommittee
Guidelines for your submission
 |
| Voices of Franklin: Joint Budget Listening Session |
