Date: 3/4/2020
SOUTHWICK – The topic of transportation dominated a presentation of the proposed Southwick-Tolland-Granville Regional School District (STGRSD) fiscal year 2021 (FY21) budget on Feb. 25.
In front of a large crowd in the Powder Mill School cafeteria, Superintendent Jennifer Willard and Director of Finance and Operations Stephen Presnal explained while the School Committee had not reached a decision at the time of the presentation, the $26.3 million budget as presented was developed with the expectation that the district would outsource its busing to the Lower Pioneer Valley Educational Collaborative (LPVEC).
Under the proposed outsourcing, the LPVEC would manage all aspects of transportation to schools in the district, affording administration and central office staff time to better focus on education. “We really want to bring our mission and vision back to the classroom,” Willard said, adding the district’s central office had a “skeleton staff with a large focus on transportation.”
LPVEC already performs transportation services for all of its other member school districts – Agawam, East Longmeadow, Hampden-Wilbraham Regional, Longmeadow, Ludlow and West Springfield. Seeking comment on how transportation operations would be maintained within the district, Reminder Publishing reached out to LPVEC Interim Co-Executive Director Anna Bishop, who said, "Unfortunately, we are not able to discuss this matter as the Southwick-Tolland-Granville Regional School District’s decision to join the LPVEC’s transportation services has not been finalized."
Willard said under an outsourcing model, the overall assessments to member districts would decrease by $127,263.
She explained the district did a side-by-side comparison of budgets with locally-owned transportation services and with the LPVEC. In owning and operating its own buses, the cost would be $25.9 million; operating with LPVEC would result in the $26.3 million budget. While there appears to be a savings of $368,237 by operating its own transportation services, Willard said the district would benefit from additional revenues from the sale of the buses and a lease through the LPVEC.
“If we self-operated, we would not have the sale of the buses, nor would be able to lease our buses,” she said, explaining the sale and leasing with the LPVEC would result in an additional $325,000 in revenue. Additionally, if the district self-operated its transportation services, it would only be able to use $530,000 in excess and deficiency funds, but in selling its buses it would be able to offset the budget with an additional $170,000.
“If you take that $495,000 and subtract the $368,000, which is the additional cost [of LPVEC service], it brings you to the negative $127,263,” she said.
Presnal explained the district had engaged in a months-long process to explore outsourcing transportation at the request of the school committee, working with officials on the district, LPVEC, local and state levels. He indicated the district did not explore private transportation companies because they would be cost-prohibitive.
“There was not a lot of guidance that was readily available since this scenario just doesn’t occur. I’m not aware of other regional school districts that own and operate their own transportation,” Presnal said. In the past, he said, only four Western Massachusetts districts owned and maintained their own fleets – Pittsfield, East Longmeadow, Monson and STGRSD. East Longmeadow also recently joined the LPVEC’s transportation network.
He assured those in attendance that as a stakeholder with seats on the Board of Governors and Board of Directors for the LPVEC, the district “would have a voice at the table as to how the organization is run and the decisions that would be made.”
In weighing the pros and cons of outsourcing, Presnal said the district would benefit from having a fixed annual cost for transportation increased focus on education, and the ability to streamline administrative aspects such as procurement, payroll, accounts payable and asset management. He also noted the district experiences significant challenges in recruiting and retaining qualified drivers, which he indicated was a nationwide issue, and the benefit of reducing the district’s Other Post Employment Benefits liability.
While as a part of the collaborative, the district would still absorb some costs related to the purchasing of buses, however, Presnal said the district would realize a decrease in facility maintenance costs. Most specifically, he pointed to the facility’s underground fuel tank, which is approaching the end of its life and would need to be replaced for an estimated $275,000 in FY23, and also requires Department of Environmental Protection insurance and other costs. The facility’s parking lot is also due for paving in FY23 at a cost of $140,000. As well, the district would avoid responsibility for retirement assessments of $140,000, $165,000 and $170,000 in FY22, 23 and 24, respectively.
Some residents voiced concerns with a perceived lack of local control. Others also feared while there was an initial savings, eventually, there would be an increased cost for LPVEC services that would have to be absorbed.
Presnal and Willard countered that by saying the district would not have annual requests of $200,000 for bus replacements, bringing down the total capital expenditures. In FY21, for example, it was noted the capital request was $385,000 when it would normally be $600,000.
When queried about the transportation facility’s gas tank, they said it would still need to be removed, but the removal cost was significantly less compared to the cost of removal and replacement.
The district’s overall budget represented a $920,853 increase – or 3.6 percent – over FY20.
Southwick would experience an assessment increase of $242,562 while Tolland and Granville would see hikes of $12,274 and $26,210, respectively.
The School Committee is expected to vote on the budget on March 31. The towns would vote to approve their budgets, including the district assessments in May.