By Nick Grabbe

Amherst could simplify and democratize the contentious process of funding our public schools by letting voters decide the final spending levels.

This year, wrangling between the School Committee and the Town Council ended in a compromise with little public involvement and much conflict. Next year, Amherst could consider an alternative.

The School Committee blew past the Council’s guideline of a 4% increase this year, despite the fact that the number of students is declining. Parents came to Council meetings with dire warnings about what would happen if the schools could not continue with “level services.” The high school principal even said that Amherst doesn’t seem to value education as much as it claims to.

In the end, they settled on a 5.0% increase for the elementary schools and a 4.8% hike in the regional budget for the fiscal year that starts July 1. This is higher than the budget increases for public safety, Town Hall and public works, all of which had open positions frozen.

“Our expenses are going up faster than our revenues,” said Councilor Cathy Schoen.

A committee composed of four councilors and the town manager is slated to meet with the School Committee and the superintendent to try to forge a path to  sustainable budgets. The first meeting has been delayed while a facilitator is sought.

If the School Committee can’t come up with a spending plan that stays within financial limits, it could just approve its budgets on a contingent basis and explain to voters why it can’t. The voters could then become educated about the issues and decide whether they’re willing to override Proposition 2 1⁄2 and raise taxes to support higher school spending.

The exact amount on the ballot for a school override, and the resulting tax increase, would need to be defined by what voters will accept. Still, it would be a tough sell.

This year’s average annual property tax for a single-family home has been $9,610, a level that is the second-highest in Western Mass. For the fiscal year starting July 1, it may top $10,000, and there will be a 20% increase in water and sewer rates on top of that. And there are fewer parents of schoolchildren than there used to be.

I am not taking a position on whether the schools should get all the funding they want. But wouldn’t it be more democratic to let voters decide, and skip all the marshaling of passionate advocates who must come to Council meetings to lobby for their favored programs?

Here’s how it would work. The town manager and the Council could specify the spending increases that would be feasible with a tax revenue increase that’s capped within Proposition 2 1/2 guidance. This year that was 4%, so let’s say that is next year’s limit too. 

The School Committee could set its own spending level, and the Town Council could use its authority to schedule an override vote and put the dollar amount over 4% on the ballot.

An override vote would involve a much broader section of our community and stimulate a deeper discussion about school spending. The override campaign should specify what programs could be lost if the schools don’t get their full funding. It should educate the public about budget realities and not be a symbolic popularity contest.

If a majority of voters say they’re willing to raise the taxation limit permanently to support this level of funding, the schools would get the full amount. If voters say no, the schools would have to live with a 4% increase.

It would be possible to expand the scope of the override by letting voters decide whether to fund other programs that generate passionate debate. This is known as a “menu override” because voters are presented with a menu of choices of what to raise taxes for. It would not be the first time Amherst has had such a vote.

Another controversial expense that could go on the ballot is the Community Responders for Equity, Safety and Service (CRESS). Created three years ago, CRESS was supposed to provide an alternative to the police for calls that don’t require armed responses.

CRESS has become largely a social service organization. Access to the responders comes from CRESS’s own phone number, not from the dispatch center, limiting cooperation with the police.

One councilor told me that most people involved in town government question the wisdom of continuing to fund CRESS in a tight budget year, and supporters aren’t happy either, saying that it should be fully funded. The town manager compromised by freezing two unfilled CRESS positions but keeping the program going. Three councilors voted against the entire budget because of the limits on CRESS funding.

A menu override could also include money for road repair. About a third of Amherst’s roads are in deplorable shape, and they will be getting worse under funding levels for the new fiscal year. Perhaps there could be a fourth option for an additional firefighter position. That department has claimed it is underfunded for many years.

An override could provide residents with motivation to become more interested in local government and offer a measure of public opinion. It would be valuable to know what voters think about these expenses.

Nick Grabbe, the co-founder of The Amherst Current, was a newspaper editor and writer based in Amherst for 32 years.