To the editor:

I just want to clarify some counterpoints made in the response to my original op-ed.

First: I did not say that funds are being cut and that funds are being shifted from the schools to other town departments. Rather, the 2.78% budget increase the schools received last year was not adequate to cover the increased costs to educate the town’s children.  Thus 9.5 positions had to be cut from the budget in order to balance the budget.  These cuts resulted in a 33% increase in my daughter’s class size this year. With this year’s draft budget a net of 2 positions will be cut. However, within the schools there will be a reallocation of resources. Nine teaching positions will be lost and seven new positions will be added in order to address the increasing needs of our student population.

Second: The author of the op-ed response inaccurately stated that “all [Town departments] have had to cut personnel. This is false. In last year’s budget, when the schools had to cut 9.5 positions, not a single other department in town had to lose any positions on account of the budget.

Third: I agree the “cliff” referenced by the author of utilizing a savings account to fund operating expense is in fact entirely forceable, and anyone paying attention to public meetings will hear the Schools sounding the alarm for several years that the cliff is coming.

I would ask a number of questions to the author in terms of his remarks on turning the wheel or hitting the brakes.

In a school department that is the 270^th lowest funded out of 322 school districts in the state, where could savings could be found?

Did the schools cut 9.5 positions last year just to embellish their request for more funding?

The 9.5 positions were not all reduced through attrition, layoffs were required. Were those layoffs not necessary to balance the budget?

My daughter’s class size increased by 33% this year due to the lack of funding provided in the budget.  How big of a class size increase is appropriate for our elementary students to absorb?

In every measurable category, Dartmouth schools are among the lowest funded in the state. Is there something special about Dartmouth that makes our education less costly than the rest of the state?  Out of 322 school districts in Massachusetts, we are 270^th in total spending, 196^th in teacher spending, 308^th in insurance and benefits, 296^th in administrative costs, 310^th in operations and maintenance, and 148^th in pupil services (bear in mind that our pupil services includes transportation, which is disproportionately skewed given the large land area of our Town).

The worst part of all of this is that there is no plan in place by the Town to address the fiscal cliff that anyone paying attention knows is coming. The schools have done enough, i.e. our children have done enough to carry the burden of the Town’s financial pressure. It’s time for the adults in town to help carry that load.

Sincerely,